What Are You Waiting For?

George Church urges those who can afford it to get their genomes sequenced.

Full-text access for registered users only. Existing users login here.
New to GenomeWeb? Register here quickly for free access.

People are probably more

People are probably more afraid of what insurrance companies might do with the results than they are of discovering their risk for specific diseases!

http://www.knome.com/advisory

Which genome? The one in my

Which genome? The one in my skin? My blood? Liver? Calf Muscle?

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6144/358.short

Are the analysts relying on archived data now known to be irreproducible 80% of the time?

Are the technicians collecting these data superior to the techs collecting that irreproducible data?

Let us know when 10 labs can arrive at the same results and 10 analysts agree on an interpretation. Until then, signal and noise can't be differentiated.

Which genome? The one in my

Which genome? The one in my skin? My blood? Liver? Calf Muscle?

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6144/358.short

Are the analysts relying on archived data now known to be irreproducible 80% of the time?

Are the technicians collecting these data superior to the techs collecting that irreproducible data?

Let us know when 10 labs can arrive at the same results and 10 analysts agree on an interpretation. Until then, signal and noise can't be differentiated.

Which genome? The one in my

Which genome? The one in my skin? My blood? Liver? Calf Muscle?

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6144/358.short

Are the analysts relying on archived data now known to be irreproducible 80% of the time?

Are the technicians collecting these data superior to the techs collecting that irreproducible data?

Let us know when 10 labs can arrive at the same results and 10 analysts agree on an interpretation. Until then, signal and noise can't be differentiated.

Which genome? The one in my

Which genome? The one in my skin? My blood? Liver? Calf Muscle?

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/341/6144/358.short

Are the analysts relying on archived data now known to be irreproducible 80% of the time?

Are the technicians collecting these data superior to the techs collecting that irreproducible data?

Let us know when 10 labs can arrive at the same results and 10 analysts agree on an interpretation. Until then, this is an exercise in hubris.

Easy, Ray. The fact is that

Easy, Ray. The fact is that most people don't really need all that information. And it is still unreliable as ray says. Of course that will eventually change along with reduced cost, making it more easily available and perhaps even more useful.

I might add that this testing

I might add that this testing is more of a market-driven (profit-motivated) phenomenon at this point, Not quite hubris, but akin to vanity.

Hahaha. Great answer,

Hahaha. Great answer, bweiner_1 :-)

Ray- DNA sequencing is

Ray-
DNA sequencing is perhaps the most reproducible experiment in molecular biology... which is why cancer treatments are based on it... please provide citations when claiming 80% of DNA sequencing experiments are not reproducible. There are institutes in the world that produce Millions of base pairs read per day with an error rate less than 1: 1,000,000,000.

And all your cells have the same genome. Way to use just one paper by one author to base your opinions on.

There are certainly cells

There are certainly cells with differences in their genomes. B and T cells have somatic recombination and mutation. Indeed there is probably a certain level of somatic mutation occuring in all cells. There is also replicative segregation and heteroplasmy possible in our mitochondrial genomes, provided one has more than one kind of mitochondrial chromosome present within ones mitochondria.
It was not a stupid question.

George, How much did you pay

George,
How much did you pay when you have sequenced your genome? I need to know cost roughly to consider even I can afford.
Are the cost going down?

In my opinion George is

In my opinion George is certainly right, but the point is when to start producing an inmature technology. That is, when is the right time to deep sequence everybody´s genome?. The point is important: while a given technology is still inmature it would be desirable to keep investing in R&D rather than moving into a production phase. By the way, mutations, and even inversions and translocations, can be repaired by several methods, as George surely knows because his group has published many nice papers on the CRISPR topic. How this repaired cells can be inplanted or whether full organs can be generated out of repaired cells is another matter, but there is no reason to be afraid of whatever the sequencing reveals because nowdays it can be repaired. Greetings!