The Best Medications For Your Genes 75
blackbearnh writes "Until recently, physicians prescribed drugs to patients with dosages based only on weight, and with no idea if the drug would be effective for that particular person. But as this article on Forbes.com highlights, the same advances in genomics that are letting people know about their likelihood of getting certain diseases can also let doctors know what drugs, and what dosages, will be likely to do the most good. 'Tamoxifen, the much-heralded cancer-fighting drug, has been shown to have little benefit for 7% to 10% of patients taking it. In the past, we would have just said that it works 90% of the time. But now, with our new genomic knowledge under our belt, we can say that it works nearly 100% of the time for people with the 'right' version of the CYP2D6 gene, and 0% of the time for people with the 'wrong' version, who make up roughly 7% to 10% of the population.'"
next up.. (Score:5, Insightful)
indications (Score:2, Insightful)
Bidil prescriptions should have been based on genetic markers. On the other hand, it's hard to do a credible whole-genome analysis for this sort of thing without a good theory in the first place.
Tailoring Medicine to Genes: What took so long? (Score:1, Insightful)
Religion is any collection of assertions that are prohibited from being questioned or verified. We simply assume them to be true.
In the case of medicine, one type of religion is the assertion that both men and women exhibit no differences in responding to treatment by the same drugs. About 15 years ago, the medical community admitted that this assertion is false [womenshealthresearch.org]. Congress began deliberately funding the development of drugs that specifically help women.
The grip of religion on medicine has still not been broken. Nowadays, the politically correct religion is the assertion that all ethnic groups and all racial groups are genetically identical. Therefore, researchers should not study ethnic or racial differences in the efficacy of various drugs.
When will we admit that there are genetic differences? For example, most East Asians suffer from lactose intolerance. Europeans do not.
The current attempt to use a person's genes to determine the efficacy of anti-cancer drugs is a first step in breaking this politically correct religion.
Re:next up.. (Score:5, Insightful)
And are you confident, given the current level of lobbying, that the U.S. government won't pass the "Comprehensive, Affordable, Reliable, Effective Health Act"? I mean who would vote against the C.A.R.E health act that's "designed to lower health premiums for hard working American families"?
You might be surprised how much more power the industry will gain if public options fail.
Public healthcare (Score:2, Insightful)
What about privacy concerns? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Public healthcare (Score:1, Insightful)
Hey man, there needs to be competition to foster new innovations in a...fairly static and sedentary industry.
I mean come on, competition exists in health care since one provides service A and the other provides...the exact same service.
Alright, someone tell me exactly how insurance companies compete with each other to foster new innovations. Hell, internet providers have at least newly developing tech for new, faster internets (although not so much in the US of A) but what can insurance companies do? Patent drugs or new procedures so only insurance provider A can provide it?
Re:next up.. (Score:3, Insightful)
What is this insurance you speak of? In my socialist hell hole we cannot be denied coverage, meaning things like this makes healthcare better, more effective, potentially cheaper (rarely do things get cheaper in this socialist paradise though..) and probably saves lives..
Re:Public healthcare (Score:4, Insightful)
Hey man, there needs to be competition to foster new innovations in a...fairly static and sedentary industry.
I mean come on, competition exists in health care since one provides service A and the other provides...the exact same service.
Alright, someone tell me exactly how insurance companies compete with each other to foster new innovations. Hell, internet providers have at least newly developing tech for new, faster internets (although not so much in the US of A) but what can insurance companies do? Patent drugs or new procedures so only insurance provider A can provide it?
Are you joking or just really fucking dumb? The comptetition does exist -- but in medicine -- where there are innovations. In hospitals however there are protocols and rules. Doctors don't "invent" anything. Denying people healthcare because they cannot afford it does not foster new innovations -- it fosters death and diseases. Diseases which later on are mutated and spread on to you, simply because the people around you couldn't afford the bill. You have to be one dumb motherfucker to not get this -- really.
In other news, say what you want about republicans or democrats, but to fight against a public healthcare system without realising how self destructive that is takes one ignorant fucker. Unfortunately in a democratic system that ignorant fucker could eventually be responsible for the state of my health -- no matter how rich or poor I am.
Re:Tailoring Medicine to Genes: What took so long? (Score:5, Insightful)
I've seen this before somewhere... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:next up.. (Score:4, Insightful)
No, I'm not that confident, but I'm taking a chance on the 23andme.com database security anyway. Just signed up and the contract does give one pause. They point out that loose talk with your doctor can be dangerous. I don't know how far law will protect a person against medical and employment discrimination in practice but they mention that the law does not protect your ability to get _life_ insurance.
On topic, they routinely test for warfarin sensitivity and Plavix efficacy.