tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3842803027215900708.post7477485820448730239..comments2024-02-05T19:48:55.300+01:00Comments on Eurogene: DTC, FDA, GAO…2006 and all thatKeith Grimaldihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03340553707811672190noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3842803027215900708.post-30488184990103298782011-02-03T13:32:02.528+01:002011-02-03T13:32:02.528+01:00@Anon
I would not define Genewize as a scam or a ...@Anon<br /><br />I would not define Genewize as a scam or a fraud without knowing more about it - it's a serious accusation to make, especially at a congress hearing. I am quite sure that Kutz does not know all the details - just like they made false accusations back in 2006.<br /><br />However - is it a scam or is it worthwhile, that is the question you need to know. Genwize/Genelink have been around for a long time. The SNPs that they have in their profiles are reasonable, there are gene-diet interactions that have been demonstrated and they do provide a bibliography. The real problem that I have is that the main business is to sell supplements. While there is nothing inherently wrong with that, the Genewize website does not give much information - yes it gives some ingredients, says they are proven, and so on BUT they do not provide the bibliography that connects SNP to supplement to positive effect. They are fairly transparent regarding the genetics but far too opaque regarding the supplements - so the question remains open, it's one you should ask them and expect a satisfactory answer to before engaging in their business.Keith Grimaldihttp://eurogene.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3842803027215900708.post-24095623835443317902011-02-03T12:44:07.678+01:002011-02-03T12:44:07.678+01:00Hi Keith,
I was approached about joining GeneWize...Hi Keith,<br /><br />I was approached about joining GeneWize. I googled GeneWize "scam" "ripoff" "fraud" and came up with much fewer results than I would have expected for multi-level marketing. I'm tempted but it still doesn't feel right. If you're comfortable, can you explain to me whether GeneWize is a fraud or are they being unjustly accused of being fraudulent? If they are a fraud is it because their science is faulty or because their business practices are shady, or both? Thanks!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3842803027215900708.post-28174815775930313562010-07-24T19:18:45.724+02:002010-07-24T19:18:45.724+02:00Keith
I couldn't agree more. The GAO really s...Keith<br /><br />I couldn't agree more. The GAO really should publish the entire transcripts of their interviews and make all the audios available online. I'm not even convinced that they got the company names right as they changed their minds a few times in the course of the hearing.<br /><br />I was very pleased to see that 23andMe did an excellent rebuff of GAO's unscientific methodology:<br /><br />http://spittoon.23andme.com/2010/07/23/gao-studies-science-non-scientifically/<br /><br />I don't suppose that any of the newspapers that published the original misleading story will publish a follow up putting the record straight.Debbie Kennetthttp://cruwys.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3842803027215900708.post-22752781057166894172010-07-24T10:32:01.350+02:002010-07-24T10:32:01.350+02:00Hi Debbie, thanks for the comment. We worked with ...Hi Debbie, thanks for the comment. We worked with the HGC on their first "Genes Direct" DTC consultation and I attended all the meetings - I agree with you completely.<br /><br />Regarding the GAO, they seem to mislead on purpose. One example is this from p16 of their report:<br /><br />"You’d be in the high risk of pretty much getting it,” is how a representative responded when our fictitious consumer asked if results indicating she was at above average risk for breast cancer meant she’s definitely getting the disease".<br /><br />On their video the actual question is "So if I am high risk does that mean I will definitely get breast cancer?"<br /><br />She indicated that she was at high risk, not "above average risk" and the reply, although clumsy, was correct!<br /><br />On p1, referring to the 2006 investigation:<br /><br />"...recommended costly dietary supplements that were in reality nothing more than inexpensive multivitamins available at any drug store"<br /><br />As I explain above, this is simply not true, they know that but continue to repeat it.Keith Grimaldihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03340553707811672190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3842803027215900708.post-22050249297114829902010-07-23T19:51:26.272+02:002010-07-23T19:51:26.272+02:00Thanks Keith for posting this. I attended the Huma...Thanks Keith for posting this. I attended the Human Genetics Commission's meeting in May when they were discussing the revised draft of their Common Framework of Principles for DTC testing. I would hope that the final report should be published shortly. The HGC's approach was very professional and in stark contrast to what we saw yesterday in Washington. The HGC have a whole team of experts with a broad spectrum of opinions. They have canvassed the views of all interested parties and user groups. It's a pity that their efforts seem to have gone completely unnoticed by the FDA and Congress.<br /><br />I am also appalled at the lax standards of journalism in America. All the US newspapers are repeating the misinformation from the GAO without question.Debbie Kennetthttp://cruwys.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.com