Forget those commercials and spam mails about diet pills, sexual enhancements, pills to cure ailments and the rest of what we get bombarded with. Those things drive doctors crazy because they are of unknown potency, are self prescribed and can cause reactions with prescribed medications.
Now comes a new kind of medical marketing that is troubling some doctors even more. It's the latest in products, the at-home genetic testing kit! A food of new online companies are marketing tests than can show predisposition to a number of genetic diseases, from breast cancer to blood clotting deficiencies.
They have come about since scientists have mapped out the genetic codes of humans. Most of those tests are inexpensive to buy and easy to administer. Most are just a cotton swab inside of the person's cheek. The results are available on line which eliminates the necessity of seeing a doctor. And a bonus here is that the test results are do not go to a patient's medical history, where insurance companies could use them to disqualify coverage.
The testing companies claim they have DNA doctors and genetic counselors to advise the on-line customer, and most require a signed doctor's order and an "informed consent" order for each test it processes. DNA Direct (one of the bigger on-line testing programs) claims it's especially good for areas where a physician is not easily available off line.
Now for the negatives of such testing. Some skeptics feel that the on-line companies don't have the expertise to properly explain the complicated results the tests give. Too, so many test results that off line doctors receive from their patients can overwhelm the off line physician. Most patients need doctors and genetic counselors to help them interpret their test results, services most of those on line companies don't offer. And of course, there are some phony companies who's services are not genuine. How does the consumer know if his or her test is a real one, interpreted by a real medical expert?
Would you use on of those on-line genetic testing places if it could save you a great deal of money over the cost of traditional genetic testing? I think I would not.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment