<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for saxonov</title><link>http://disqus.com/people/saxonov/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2008 22:30:38 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: I don&amp;#8217;t want a 23andMe &amp;#8212; I want the real genetic tests</title><link>http://thinkgene.disqus.com/i_don8217t_want_a_23andme_8212_i_want_the_real_genetic_tests/#comment-2504517</link><description>Not really well established if you rely on the 3 papers which published different results and penetrance rates all over the place....&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I am writing the authors of the gene tests article, b/c there is hype in it.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;-Steve&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.thegenesherpa.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow"&gt;www.thegenesherpa.blogspot.com&lt;/a&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">helixhealth</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2008 22:30:38 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: I don&amp;#8217;t want a 23andMe &amp;#8212; I want the real genetic tests</title><link>http://thinkgene.disqus.com/i_don8217t_want_a_23andme_8212_i_want_the_real_genetic_tests/#comment-2501694</link><description>Yeah,  the high penetrance is very well established. So there are many references.&lt;br&gt;For example, here is a pretty big paper that came out in July: &lt;a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18539534" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18539534&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;Also, this is a good resource:&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bookshelf/br.fcgi?book=gene&amp;part=lrrk2#lrrk2.Clinical_Description" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bookshelf/br.fcgi?b...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br&gt;(scroll down to penetrance).</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">saxonov</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2008 17:42:38 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: I don&amp;#8217;t want a 23andMe &amp;#8212; I want the real genetic tests</title><link>http://thinkgene.disqus.com/i_don8217t_want_a_23andme_8212_i_want_the_real_genetic_tests/#comment-2478211</link><description>Do you have a source for that? I was going off of Steve Murphy's post here:  &lt;a href="http://thegenesherpa.blogspot.com/2008/09/lrrk2-and-parkinson-disease.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;http://thegenesherpa.blogspot.com/2008/09/lrrk2...&lt;/a&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">kevinfischer</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2008 16:25:31 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: I don&amp;#8217;t want a 23andMe &amp;#8212; I want the real genetic tests</title><link>http://thinkgene.disqus.com/i_don8217t_want_a_23andme_8212_i_want_the_real_genetic_tests/#comment-2454950</link><description>One clarification re "I don’t particularly care about a mutation that gives me a slightly increased risk for a disease. "  The increased risk is not slight.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;This mutation is actually quite penetrant. It increases one's baseline risk by a factor of about  20, which is why Sergey said that his chances of developing PD are between 20 and 80%.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">saxonov</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2008 14:12:53 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>