<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Think Gene - Latest Comments in Quick Quiz: Are you competitant to understand genomic tests?</title><link>http://thinkgene.disqus.com/</link><description>a bio blog about genetics, genomics, and biotechnology</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 11:51:20 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Quick Quiz: Are you competitant to understand genomic tests?</title><link>http://www.thinkgene.com/quick-quiz-are-you-competitant-to-understand-genomic-tests/#comment-3409423</link><description>1% of people will have Hubbub Disease by age 70.  But if you test positive for HEBOT, you have a 7.8% chance of having Hubbub Disease.  That's an almost 8 fold increase.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;You can take action based on this.  You can increase your retirement savings to prepare for higher medical costs.  You can take disability insurance.  You can be on the lookout for symptoms, etc.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;   Plus, you can probably use other clinical tests to further improve the predictive power of the test.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Anon in Montreal</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 11:51:20 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Quick Quiz: Are you competitant to understand genomic tests?</title><link>http://www.thinkgene.com/quick-quiz-are-you-competitant-to-understand-genomic-tests/#comment-2983220</link><description>YES, that is correct. They are not accurate, and I did state that, but you're right, I should make it more obviously nonsensical. Thanks, neandrothal.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">drewyates</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 12:56:39 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Quick Quiz: Are you competitant to understand genomic tests?</title><link>http://www.thinkgene.com/quick-quiz-are-you-competitant-to-understand-genomic-tests/#comment-2982741</link><description>Just a quick note: these numbers are *not* accurate numbers for Parkinson's disease.  They're the same (fake) numbers as in the Yudkowsky example.  I hope people don't switch the 80% numbers around in their heads and think that 80% of people with Parkinson's have LRRK2 G2019S, though it is true that some studies report that people with LRRK2 G2019S may have up to an 80% lifetime risk of Parkinson's (i.e. penetrance of the disease given the mutation = up to 80%).</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">neandrothal</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 12:30:24 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>