Comments on: Genetic Breakthroughs for Today http://scienceroll.com/2007/05/28/genetic-breakthroughs-for-today/ A doctor's journey in genetics PhD and medicine through web 2.0 Tue, 14 Feb 2012 15:32:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: melissa http://scienceroll.com/2007/05/28/genetic-breakthroughs-for-today/#comment-47054 Wed, 25 Nov 2009 07:43:17 +0000 http://scienceroll.com/2007/05/28/genetic-breakthroughs-for-today/#comment-47054 Robin,

I have tested positive for 1983del5 as well. I am currently weighing my options and trying to come to terms with what this will mean for me. I would be interested in any insight you have to offer.

Melissa

]]> By: Robin Hutson http://scienceroll.com/2007/05/28/genetic-breakthroughs-for-today/#comment-34700 Fri, 11 Apr 2008 15:09:16 +0000 http://scienceroll.com/2007/05/28/genetic-breakthroughs-for-today/#comment-34700 I also tested positive for the deletion 1983del5. I would love to hear from others if possible.

]]> By: Bertalan Meskó http://scienceroll.com/2007/05/28/genetic-breakthroughs-for-today/#comment-10937 Tue, 29 May 2007 17:14:46 +0000 http://scienceroll.com/2007/05/28/genetic-breakthroughs-for-today/#comment-10937 I don’t think it would be a bad thing. But have you taken a look at my Choosing genetic defects article? That is a BAD thing.

“I won’t beat a dead horse” — it is the sentence of the day :)

The last thing you said is incredibly important. You should write about this “unsexity” of family histories!

Thanks for dropping by!

]]> By: Steven Murphy MD http://scienceroll.com/2007/05/28/genetic-breakthroughs-for-today/#comment-10776 Mon, 28 May 2007 20:33:56 +0000 http://scienceroll.com/2007/05/28/genetic-breakthroughs-for-today/#comment-10776 2 outta 3 ain’t bad. Personally I know famlies who do have children to do precisely this thing now being allowed. Is it a BAD thing? Well it depends on how you and your society views it.
The X-prize like research is a great idea to develop collaboration and speed up research which has been terribly slow in this awful disease.
Lastly, These “new” genes found have been implicated in many other diseases. On top of that, they are not nearly as penetrant(disease causing) as BRCAs. So what a “single blood test” would mean is highly suspect. The old media has a wonderful way of HYPING everything. I would post this complaint on mine, but I already have with other findings. So “I won’t beat a dead horse”
These genes are much like the multifactorial genes in diabetes that DNADirect is offering testing for. A simple family history will give you more risk than these genes. But you never see “FAMILY HISTORY SAVES LIVES” on the news because its not as sexy.

-Steve
http://www.thegenesherpa.blogspot.com

]]>