Anti-pharma Luddites -- in an ideologically induced haze -- can't decide whether to call for additionally safety studies (PPIs) or to call them off (Avandia) consistently ignore the value of using gene testing to personalize drug response and optimize care. The reason is obvious. Keeping people in the dark about whether a medicine will help a lot or a little, or help or hurt breed uncertainty and uncertainty is the wellspring of fear and fear is what allows the Luddites to continue their very profitable campaign against commercialization. If people know or knew the relative risks and benefits of medicines, then the fearmongering would be ineffective..
Hence, the launch of Pathway Genomics gene test for drug response and disease risk via Walgreen's (and CVS) is most welcome. From what I can tell, Pathway's approach is medically and scientifically responsible. Their scientific management is top-notch and careful. And spreading the knowledge of what drugs or doses can help or hurt is, like cholesterol levels, information that can advance the public health.
But of course it will have it's critics. And enemies.
Which is why the FDA "investigation" of the Pathway product - now -- after it has been on the market for over a year should raise eyebrows. Given Peter Lurie's connection with Luddites like Goozner, Wolfe, Mahar, Diane Zuckerman etc. it would and will be interesting to see how these "experts" who of course have no bias whatsoever weigh in on the Pathway-Walgreen's alliance. And it will be interesting to see if the FDA, which seems to be involved in everything but advancing The Critical Path and regulatory science these days, makes a federal case out of a science-based effort to educate patients about the important role genes and genetic response plays in response to medicine and prospective health.
I have a hunch how Maggie Mahar will react.
www.pathway.com/more_info/health_test#q6
Hence, the launch of Pathway Genomics gene test for drug response and disease risk via Walgreen's (and CVS) is most welcome. From what I can tell, Pathway's approach is medically and scientifically responsible. Their scientific management is top-notch and careful. And spreading the knowledge of what drugs or doses can help or hurt is, like cholesterol levels, information that can advance the public health.
But of course it will have it's critics. And enemies.
Which is why the FDA "investigation" of the Pathway product - now -- after it has been on the market for over a year should raise eyebrows. Given Peter Lurie's connection with Luddites like Goozner, Wolfe, Mahar, Diane Zuckerman etc. it would and will be interesting to see how these "experts" who of course have no bias whatsoever weigh in on the Pathway-Walgreen's alliance. And it will be interesting to see if the FDA, which seems to be involved in everything but advancing The Critical Path and regulatory science these days, makes a federal case out of a science-based effort to educate patients about the important role genes and genetic response plays in response to medicine and prospective health.
I have a hunch how Maggie Mahar will react.
www.pathway.com/more_info/health_test#q6
