Unless you can cite a single case of a doctor taking action based solely on a 23andMe test, then they are not a medical diagnostic lab.
Of course this would be less of a problem if patients were allowed to order some tests on their own, and if those tests were low cost.
Submitting your test platform to new and extensive quality controls, running double-blind tests, hiring additional quality control personnel... none of this is free. To "prove" that a test is reliable to the FDA costs lots of money. This is (one of the reasons) why it's estimated that it costs 1 billion dollars to develop a new drug.
If you're saying that only a fully verified test is allowable, then you're saying that low cost test are illegal. It is not possible for a company to sell such a comprehensive test for such a low cost. I for one am willing to take a chance that some of the results might be wrong (but probably aren't) in exchange for a very low cost.
Nobody is forcing you to submit your samples to 23andMe. Of course there should be standards for police DNA evidence labs. But 23andMe is basically an entertaining service that also provides some health information. Why shouldn't consenting adults be allowed to submit their DNA to it? Especially when there is no health hazard at all (unlike "radium water").
So if you can't afford to get this low cost and effective test ($99) then you should get nothing at all?
Their test is more than reliable enough for most purposes. And if you're planning on getting a double mastectomy, obviously your surgeon will do a specific follow up test.
Thanks, but I don't need such favors from the FDA. I knew exactly what I was doing when I gave my DNA, and I've gotten valuable and entertaining information as a result.
I can see that a ChromeBook for $400 or less makes a lot of sense and would interest a lot of people. It's a nice extra computer for the living room or for a vacation. But at over $1000 I wonder what the market will be? It's too expensive to be just a toy and it's not powerful enough to be used as your only machine.
Rightly or wrongly, many things are mandated by the government and sometimes even made monopolistic (seatbelts, vaccines, safety testing, etc.). There is nothing wrong with companies profiting from filling such needs. What is wrong is the loss of freedom that comes from the naked scanners (and the fact that they're ineffective, possibly dangerous, and were awarded to a government insider).
Redundancy costs money. So the real question is: "Are customers (consumers) willing to pay?"
Or perhaps a better idea is: You will pay either way. Chose: (1) Pay money now for redundancy and a guarantee of supply; or (2) "Pay" later through the unavailability of products.
There's already enough evidence that earth is >6,000 years and yet some people don't believe it. There's also enough evidence for evolution today, so I doubt the situation will change in 30 years. Perhaps things will change when we're able to create life from scratch (go Venter!) or simulate consciousness in a computer.
I would have thought that the answer is pretty obvious: A riot will be considered illegal if three things are true:
1- The police (usually provincial -- nothing to do with the Federal Conservatives) consider it a riot, and arrest you;
2- The Crown attorney (usually provincial -- nothing to do with the Federal Conservatives) agrees with the police and presses charges; and
3- The judge or jury agree with the Crown attorney and convict you.
In a free country like Canada, if you're reached this stage, it probably means that you did in fact participate in a riot.
How did this get modded "insightful"? Can you name a single protest which has been deemed "unlawful" by this government? Don't you know that in Canada it's judges who would make that decision anyway? Do you think your inflamed rhetoric is conducive to legitimate debate?
What a poor summary (shock!)
- It was not the (federal) Conservatives who arrested protestors during the G8/G20, but the (Provincial, Ontario) Liberals.
- You cannot compare a maximum sentence (10 years) with an actual sentence (5 years). In Canada that "10 year" sentence would probably translate into a suspended sentence (0 days) unless aggravating factors were present (violence).
- The bill is redundant anyway, since (according to TFA!) the "Criminal Code... already criminalizes the wearing of a disguise."
I'll second that. QuickPar ( http://www.quickpar.org.uk/ ) has been exceptionally useful to me over and over again. I can check file integrity, recover minor corruption, and revert to past file states if I accidentally modify old archived files. It's also free. The only unfortunate thing is that it doesn't seem to be under development anymore, but at least it still works with Win7/64.
For archival purposes, I've started using WinRAR ( http://www.rarlabs.com/ ) with the file authenticity and recovery options checked. Unfortunately none of this helps you now, but it will help in the future at least...
"Most of the computer scenarios found population and economic growth continuing at a steady rate"
That's already a sign that their models are wrong. Did their models, if run on historical data, predict: the 1930's depression? the 1970's stagflation? the babyboom? the current economic situation? the current population growth trends in Africa?...
Humans (and markets) are adaptable. If resources get scarce, prices rise. People change their behaviors.
This episode should serve as a reminder/proof that we should stick to good old fashioned paper based voting for as long as we can. Besides the fact that it's easier to run attacks on e-voting, there is also the nagging doubt that will always linger about the results when the count is close (ie: can you really be sure the algorithms weren't tampered with?)
Elections Canada has so far identified only one "riding" (district) where many robo-calls were placed, and this riding was won decisively by the Liberals. So far, it is estimated by independent media that exactly -zero- ridings were swung either way. But don't let the facts get in the way of your opinions.
Talk about flamebait. So far the investigation points to one young guy, and not even the opposition is accusing any government/party officials of any wrongdoing.
Political discourse would be a lot more civil if people didn't throw around baseless accusations.
Smartphones are worse, because once they seize them and download their contents, additional info can be recovered: GPS tracks, search engine logs, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
Unless you can cite a single case of a doctor taking action based solely on a 23andMe test, then they are not a medical diagnostic lab. Of course this would be less of a problem if patients were allowed to order some tests on their own, and if those tests were low cost.
Submitting your test platform to new and extensive quality controls, running double-blind tests, hiring additional quality control personnel... none of this is free. To "prove" that a test is reliable to the FDA costs lots of money. This is (one of the reasons) why it's estimated that it costs 1 billion dollars to develop a new drug.
If you're saying that only a fully verified test is allowable, then you're saying that low cost test are illegal. It is not possible for a company to sell such a comprehensive test for such a low cost. I for one am willing to take a chance that some of the results might be wrong (but probably aren't) in exchange for a very low cost.
Nobody is forcing you to submit your samples to 23andMe. Of course there should be standards for police DNA evidence labs. But 23andMe is basically an entertaining service that also provides some health information. Why shouldn't consenting adults be allowed to submit their DNA to it? Especially when there is no health hazard at all (unlike "radium water").
So if you can't afford to get this low cost and effective test ($99) then you should get nothing at all? Their test is more than reliable enough for most purposes. And if you're planning on getting a double mastectomy, obviously your surgeon will do a specific follow up test.
Thanks, but I don't need such favors from the FDA. I knew exactly what I was doing when I gave my DNA, and I've gotten valuable and entertaining information as a result.
I have no affiliation to 23andMe except as a satisfied customer. I have found 23andMe's services very useful and low cost to me, and hope that they are not destroyed by this FDA action. https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/overrule-fdas-decision-bar-23andme-selling-their-potentially-life-saving-diagnostic-kits/96BRCYNB
I can see that a ChromeBook for $400 or less makes a lot of sense and would interest a lot of people. It's a nice extra computer for the living room or for a vacation. But at over $1000 I wonder what the market will be? It's too expensive to be just a toy and it's not powerful enough to be used as your only machine.
Rightly or wrongly, many things are mandated by the government and sometimes even made monopolistic (seatbelts, vaccines, safety testing, etc.). There is nothing wrong with companies profiting from filling such needs.
What is wrong is the loss of freedom that comes from the naked scanners (and the fact that they're ineffective, possibly dangerous, and were awarded to a government insider).
Redundancy costs money. So the real question is: "Are customers (consumers) willing to pay?"
Or perhaps a better idea is: You will pay either way. Chose: (1) Pay money now for redundancy and a guarantee of supply; or (2) "Pay" later through the unavailability of products.
No, it's been going on at many airports: "Similar audio-video equipment has been operating at other Canadian airports and ports of entry for "many years," according to the CBSA" ( http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/politics/Toews+orders+airport+eavesdropping+pending+privacy+review/6807247/story.html )
(I forgot the name but may be Magic or Lantis or something like that).
You're talking about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_Lantern_(software)
There's already enough evidence that earth is >6,000 years and yet some people don't believe it. There's also enough evidence for evolution today, so I doubt the situation will change in 30 years. Perhaps things will change when we're able to create life from scratch (go Venter!) or simulate consciousness in a computer.
I would have thought that the answer is pretty obvious: A riot will be considered illegal if three things are true:
1- The police (usually provincial -- nothing to do with the Federal Conservatives) consider it a riot, and arrest you;
2- The Crown attorney (usually provincial -- nothing to do with the Federal Conservatives) agrees with the police and presses charges; and
3- The judge or jury agree with the Crown attorney and convict you.
In a free country like Canada, if you're reached this stage, it probably means that you did in fact participate in a riot.
Whether you wear a mask or not would make no difference in the example you use. You could still be arrested for participating in a riot.
How did this get modded "insightful"? Can you name a single protest which has been deemed "unlawful" by this government? Don't you know that in Canada it's judges who would make that decision anyway? Do you think your inflamed rhetoric is conducive to legitimate debate?
What a poor summary (shock!) ... already criminalizes the wearing of a disguise."
- It was not the (federal) Conservatives who arrested protestors during the G8/G20, but the (Provincial, Ontario) Liberals.
- You cannot compare a maximum sentence (10 years) with an actual sentence (5 years). In Canada that "10 year" sentence would probably translate into a suspended sentence (0 days) unless aggravating factors were present (violence).
- The bill is redundant anyway, since (according to TFA!) the "Criminal Code
For archival purposes, I've started using WinRAR ( http://www.rarlabs.com/ ) with the file authenticity and recovery options checked. Unfortunately none of this helps you now, but it will help in the future at least...
"Most of the computer scenarios found population and economic growth continuing at a steady rate"
...
That's already a sign that their models are wrong. Did their models, if run on historical data, predict: the 1930's depression? the 1970's stagflation? the babyboom? the current economic situation? the current population growth trends in Africa?
Humans (and markets) are adaptable. If resources get scarce, prices rise. People change their behaviors.
InTrade already has a market running on this issue, where you can bet real money: https://www.intrade.com/v4/markets/contract/?contractId=745353
Has this software been subjected to repeated double-blind testing? Otherwise, there's no point in reporting this.
This episode should serve as a reminder/proof that we should stick to good old fashioned paper based voting for as long as we can. Besides the fact that it's easier to run attacks on e-voting, there is also the nagging doubt that will always linger about the results when the count is close (ie: can you really be sure the algorithms weren't tampered with?)
Elections Canada has so far identified only one "riding" (district) where many robo-calls were placed, and this riding was won decisively by the Liberals. So far, it is estimated by independent media that exactly -zero- ridings were swung either way. But don't let the facts get in the way of your opinions.
Talk about flamebait. So far the investigation points to one young guy, and not even the opposition is accusing any government/party officials of any wrongdoing.
Political discourse would be a lot more civil if people didn't throw around baseless accusations.
Smartphones are worse, because once they seize them and download their contents, additional info can be recovered: GPS tracks, search engine logs, etc.