Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

23andMe's Fall

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 282 posts

Re: 23andMe's Fall

#151

Post by astrange »

belval wrote: post #108
Shank wrote: post #33

> To create a recurring revenue stream from the tests, Wojcicki has pivoted to subscriptions. As media companies launched streaming “+” channels, Wojcicki rolled out 23andMe+, offering personalized health reports, lifestyle advice and unspecified “new reports and features as discoveries are made” for an initial $229, with annual renewals of $69. I was a heavy believer of 23andMe until this point. I answered all of th…

As someone who paid for 23andme+, it was pretty much a scam anyway, I got maybe 4-5 more reports over the year, all of which were for random popular ailments like "Anxiety" where the link between your genes and the disease(?) are pretty dubious in the literature and the takeaway was "you are 5% more likely to experience anxiety".

> where the link between your genes and the disease(?) are pretty dubious in the literature

This is inescapable; genetics usually can't show causation, for instance because you can't do an experiment where you change someone's genes.

Geneticists seem to deal with this by using statistics like GWAS that are obviously just correlation, adding a sentence that correlation doesn't show causation, and then just proceeding and pretending like it does.

Re: 23andMe's Fall

#152

Post by bumby »

kjellsbells wrote: post #110

Ah, 23andMe, the Experian of DNA. Look, I give her great credit for the women in STEM thing, her perseverance in the light of obstacles, and making a 10$ lab kit worth $399 to buyers. But to not understand how far actors would go to get hold of that data, to not understand that the drug industry is brutal because humans are poorly-understood meatsacks (see: anything by Derek Lowe), well, seems like that Yale educatio…

>10$ lab kit worth $399

Can you elaborate? Does this mean they've added $389 in value, or they swindled people of $389?

If it's the former, what did they do to create that value? (Not being snarky, I don't know enough about their business and am legitimately curious. There seems to be a lot of comments here about unfulfilled promises.)

Re: 23andMe's Fall

#153

Post by astrange »

crotchfire wrote: post #6
htrp wrote: post #3

> Roelof Botha, a 23andMe board member and partner at Sequoia Capital, said the company’s big-spending strategy made sense when money was cheap. Now that it isn’t, “we’ve had to trim and focus on a smaller number of projects.” > Sequoia, which invested $145 million in 23andMe, still holds all its shares, he said. Today they are worth $18 million. Interesting that they weren't forced to liquidate/distribute the shares…

That would impede their plan to sell 23andMe, including its DNA database, to China (or Russia, or Antarctica, or the next Martians that happen along).

The problem with all these conspiracy theories about selling your DNA results is

1. your DNA results are not interesting to anyone even if they're evil.

2. if someone wanted your DNA in particular, they just need a bit of your hair, so there is already absolutely nothing you could do to stop them.

Re: 23andMe's Fall

#154

Post by Analemma_ »

samtho wrote: post #131
dkarl wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I haven’t been able to bring myself to do it, due to trust issues related to handing over something like that Same here. Imagine the value of this data in the hands of insurance companies that are willing to misuse it. Will we, as a society, be able to prevent that "value" from being realized?

Federally, health insurers cannot use this data under GINA[0] and SB41[1] in California requires explicit permission be granted by the customer in order for the data to be shared with 3rd parties. In general, however, insurance companies are going to be reluctant to trust this information as it’s not established that it has real medical value outside the handful of markers we’ve clearly identified. [0]: https://medli…

Oh, it's against the law! Well that's ok then, companies never break laws.

In reality, there will be (and probably already is) an impenetrable web of "data aggregators" buying genome data from other aggregators who are buying it from still other aggregators, so that the info will be thoroughly laundered by the time it actually gets to the insurance company to hike your premiums. This both obscures its true origin and lets there be a little contractor to throw under the bus when discovered and deflect blame. Don't fucking kid yourself: if personal genome data is useful, it will be used, no matter what the law says.

Re: 23andMe's Fall

#155

Post by sib »

BasilPH wrote: post #115
Shank wrote: post #33

> To create a recurring revenue stream from the tests, Wojcicki has pivoted to subscriptions. As media companies launched streaming “+” channels, Wojcicki rolled out 23andMe+, offering personalized health reports, lifestyle advice and unspecified “new reports and features as discoveries are made” for an initial $229, with annual renewals of $69. I was a heavy believer of 23andMe until this point. I answered all of th…

> As an added security measure, we have temporarily disabled the ability to download your raw genetic data. We hope to re-enable this ability soon, and we appreciate your patience. Apparently 23andMe doesn't let you download the data anymore, I just tried. I wanted to give Promethease a go, seems interesting.

Wouldn't laws in certain jurisdictions require them to allow you to download your data?

Re: 23andMe's Fall

#156

Post by astrange »

Timber-6539 wrote: post #97
gsky wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless dollar looses it's reserved currency status Silicon valley is going to be fine

Silicon valley's tokenomics are going bust because of the Fed's tightening. Loosing the reserve currency status is another matter altogether which should scare the future of the American economy.

That wouldn't matter. "Exorbitant privilege" is a thing but it's not that much of a thing. Notice Argentina, which has the opposite of our privilege, still gets loans - there's no other set of countries for lenders to go to.

The reason it looks like we have magic fiscal policy and Europe doesn't is that Europe just loves austerity and refuses to print money basically because they're stubborn. They could and should do it too.

Re: 23andMe's Fall

#157

Post by zamadatix »

astrange wrote: post #148
hoistbypetard wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do too. That's why I've refused to use the kits I've been gifted... I assumed the fallback here was to build up a cache of data to sell. I'd be nice if they could be prevented from doing that, possibly by the court system.

Selling it is not a problem for the same reason they can't make a profit from it. It's not worth much. (They do have valuable data, but it's the survey answers and friend and family connections. Nobody really cares you have a G at SNP 12213244243.)

Well, nobody is really interested in the test to find out they have G at SNP 12213244243 either. They do it specifically to get the ancestry, health, and potential physical bias type information you mention - that's the only real data anyone is talking about when referencing the test. Plenty of companies would love to have that kind of data to target users with.

The real killer would probably be around how useless healthcare regulation could make having most of that data. I'm not sure how far that really extends or what you manage to sign away by sending in your sample though.

Re: 23andMe's Fall

#158

Post by belval »

astrange wrote: post #151
belval wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who paid for 23andme+, it was pretty much a scam anyway, I got maybe 4-5 more reports over the year, all of which were for random popular ailments like "Anxiety" where the link between your genes and the disease(?) are pretty dubious in the literature and the takeaway was "you are 5% more likely to experience anxiety".

> where the link between your genes and the disease(?) are pretty dubious in the literature This is inescapable; genetics usually can't show causation, for instance because you can't do an experiment where you change someone's genes. Geneticists seem to deal with this by using statistics like GWAS that are obviously just correlation, adding a sentence that correlation doesn't show causation, and then just proceeding…

Sure, perhaps that was a bit too succint. What I mean is that, as a customer of 23andme, I'd much rather know about some known genetic disease that I may or may not have than about wide-ranging things that affect everyone like stress and anxiety. It's just not as serious.

23andme went with the "only give very limited information" which I respect but is ultimately pretty much useless compared to just running your data against dbSNP and telling me that I have this or that marker for this or that disease backed by this or that paper.

Re: 23andMe's Fall

#159

Post by yeahwhatever10 »

shmatt wrote: post #76
Shank wrote: post #33

> To create a recurring revenue stream from the tests, Wojcicki has pivoted to subscriptions. As media companies launched streaming “+” channels, Wojcicki rolled out 23andMe+, offering personalized health reports, lifestyle advice and unspecified “new reports and features as discoveries are made” for an initial $229, with annual renewals of $69. I was a heavy believer of 23andMe until this point. I answered all of th…

Promethease is why i initially did 23andme, and it was beyond worth it for me personally. But for the same reason I'm just a one time customer, all I needed was for 23andme to give me a very expensive hospital test at a 95% discount, and I didn't need them anumore

Can you explain how you got a 95% discount?

Re: 23andMe's Fall

#160

Post by htrp »

atemerev wrote: post #20
htrp wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1 of the co-founders had access to an unlimited pool of personal capital (at least until personal issues curtailed that). The other had an idea. Make sure you are the co-founder with the sustainable advantage

Yeah, yeah, make sure you are born into a rich family and a right zip code.

That too....

but more of an object lesson that as the needs of the company change, the board/your co-founders will constantly re-evaluate whether you are still adding value.

Post reply on HN