The "power" of predictive sequencing
Twitter commentary on Roberts et. al. Science Translational Medicine study claiming that predictive personal genome sequencing has little value (http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/early/2012/04/02/scitranslmed.3003380).
This study says healthy people won't be helped by their sequence. @bmahersciwriter #GWASisDEAD
is massive overstatement a prerequisite for working on anything related to GWAS? @matthewherper @bmahersciwriter
@matthewherper @bmahersciwriter I was going to write up the paper but was incredibly underwhelmed.- @matthewherper @bmahersciwriter Most interesting thing to me was Science put it up (under embargo) last wk to give reporters more time.
- What were you overwhelmed by? the idea that genomics won't be predictive is pretty powerful, no? @edyong209 @bmahersciwriter
@matthewherper @edyong209 @bmahersciencewriter that's not a new idea, & ppl I talked to thought twin methodology v problematic- It's not a new idea, but it strikes me as a convincing way to explain it... @Erika_Check @edyong209 @bmahersciencewriter
@matthewherper @Erika_Check @edyong209 @bmahersciencewr @mbeisen @joe_pickrell having seen the paper, way less here than made out to be.- @matthewherper @Erika_Check @edyong209 @bmahersciencewr @mbeisen @joe_pickrell we already knew identical twins often discordant for disease.
- @matthewherper @Erika_Check @edyong209 @bmahersciencewr @mbeisen @joe_pickrell and that most ppl won't get any given disease. nothing more.
- It's more a teaching moment than a result. @leonidkruglyak @Erika_Check @edyong209 @bmahersciencewr @mbeisen @joe_pickrell
- @matthewherper right, so why claim it's a result? #OldWineNewBottle @Erika_Check @edyong209 @bmahersciencewr @mbeisen @joe_pickrell
- to reach general public? see nyti.ms/HF6CtI MT @leonidkruglyak why claim new result? @matthewherper @edyong209 @mbeisen @joe_pickrell
- @Erika_Check @leonidkruglyak @matthewherper @edyong209 @joe_pickrell then write for the general public - don't overhype a result
- @matthewherper @bmahersciencewriter @edyong209 interesting Q: what to do if a finding will get tons of coverage but sources pan it?
- @matthewherper @edyong209 @bmahersciwriter not enough space/time to pick apart every specious result, but some are worth explaining.
- Actually, then you can do a "The NYTimes is Wrong" post. People like 'em. @Erika_Check @edyong209 @bmahersciwriter
- @Erika_Check @matthewherper @bmahersciwriter Helpful to have voice of reason to complement broader and less hard-won coverage, I'd say.
- @Erika_Check @matthewherper @bmahersciwriter I think one question might be "Are the sources panning the finding on interesting grounds?"
- not new, and highly suspect, I believe. RT @matthewherper: @Erika_Check @edyong209 @bmahersciwriter But is this wrong or "not new"?
