Consumer DNA Testing May Be The Biggest Health Scam Of The Decade

[meatbag]

Consumer DNA Testing May Be The Biggest Health Scam Of The Decade

 

[MetabolicTrash]

Consumer DNA Testing May Be The Biggest Health Scam Of The Decade

In the article:

It accused them of deceptively claiming their products could predict the odds of developing more than a dozen medical conditions; some even went as far to offer equally dubious dietary supplements.

So some DNA testing companies are trying to argue in favor of genes (largely immutable in their portrayal across many things), but then trying to push supplements to fix said gene problems that are believed to be more "hard wired" in us?

Isn't that kind of ironic? It is like they're telling you how your genes will predict your health or various disease propensity or etc., while at the same time trying to sell supplements that will supposedly resolve these genetic-excused causes.

If you can simply take a supplement and fix genetic problems, the gene debate is rendered pretty much insignificant then for the most part. Even giving the benefit of the doubt, this approach would surely mean gene testing is only valid as a way of determining changeable problems (from the angle of preventive or health management/concerns at least) as opposed to falling back to the understanding that genes are excuses for every mishap or downside one faces, along with the inverse (that are largely believed to be unchangeable basically and responsible for "everything").

 

[DiabloQueso]

Isn't that kind of ironic? It is like they're telling you how your genes will predict your health or various disease propensity or etc., while at the same time trying to sell supplements that will supposedly resolve these genetic-excused causes.

Things you're genetically prone to develop are probably the most important ones to preemptively treat. No one in my family has had major liver problems despite most of them being obese. I'm not worried about my liver. Several have had total kidney failure - I'm far more concerned about this. I've been trying to avoid harmful things to kidneys as much as possible. Will it stop in me? It may have no impact, but it's worth doing IMO.

That said, a DNA test wouldn't be able to predict any illness that family history wouldn't do a much better job of predicting. All DNA trends are is a *very* extended family. My immediate family is lot closer to my DNA than "Scandinavian people". "Scandinavian people" is probably good for blind screening or public policy, but it's not great for individual diagnoses or prediction.

 

[MetabolicTrash]

Things you're genetically prone to develop are probably the most important ones to preemptively treat. No one in my family has had major liver problems despite most of them being obese. I'm not worried about my liver. Several have had total kidney failure - I'm far more concerned about this. I've been trying to avoid harmful things to kidneys as much as possible. Will it stop in me? It may have no impact, but it's worth doing IMO.

That said, a DNA test wouldn't be able to predict any illness that family history wouldn't do a much better job of predicting. All DNA trends are is a *very* extended family. My immediate family is lot closer to my DNA than "Scandinavian people". "Scandinavian people" is probably good for blind screening or public policy, but it's not great for individual diagnoses or prediction.

My understanding is that a lot of things you're "genetically prone to develop" are not understood in the proper way as implied "genetically" in the first place.

People may try and reduce everything to genes but it seems the bigger picture is always ignored on how this whole genetic intervention even plays a role in associated disease pathology -- or certain conditions in general that could apply to anyone.

I had thought it was the gene (expression) that was changed and carried on epigenetically through means of environment and natural circumstances/choices/etc. -- not that genes were fixed and predictive from the allopathic medicine point of view in how they're blamed for everything in a baseless sort of way that ignores adaptation or such, which negates the immutability argument more on how modern medicine sees things a lot. "There is no cure -- only 'treating' the problem." Maybe the problem is not even knowing the issue and how it persists, otherwise you'd maybe then know how to approach a cure vs. a band-aid/temporary patch (unless neglectful/with malice).

Looking at conditions solely from the genes lens seems subpar overall, which likely explains some hypocrisy with the DNA/health/medicine/etc. approach paradigms. Essentially I think many people picture genes as immutable parts of individual being/groups of bloodlines that define us and our conditions, rather than changing and adaptive (outside just genes themselves) vehicles that are very similar in us all besides minor differences in expression.

 

[DiabloQueso]

Looking at conditions solely from the genes lens seems subpar overall

True. If genes were the only determining factor, there would be no treatment. I look at it as a piece in the puzzle. Sometimes a small piece(rheumatoid arthritis), sometimes a very large piece(Hunting's disease).