The Biomedical Testing Revolution Promises a Theranos That Actually Works
Most cancer diagnoses and deaths are due to cancers for which there are no recommended screening tests.

"Cancer signal not detected." That was the happy finding of my Galleri multi-cancer early detection (MCED) blood test from the Silicon Valley biotech company GRAIL. The Galleri test presages an emerging wave of new precision biomedical tests produced by a panoply of biotech startups.
GRAIL's MCED test analyzes DNA shed by both normal and cancerous cells into a person's bloodstream, looking for telltale epigenetic changes that affect the way genes operate. Specific changes are associated with the presence of cancer cells.
Published research indicates that the test can detect a shared signal across more than 50 types of cancer. They include pancreatic, liver, and kidney cancers, which are difficult to diagnose early. The Galleri test not only detects a cancer signal but also provides two predictions of the cancer signal's origin to inform further diagnostic evaluation.
MCED screening is a potentially significant advance because there are currently only five recommended cancer screening tests: for breast, colorectal, lung, cervical, and prostate cancers. Around 70 percent of new cancer diagnoses and deaths are due to cancers for which there are no recommended screening tests.
The Galleri MCED test is undergoing several clinical trials, including a randomized controlled trial under the auspices of the U.K.'s National Health Service. That trial is enrolling 140,000 participants to determine if early detection is associated with a statistically significant reduction in the incidence of late-stage cancers.
A 2021 epidemiological modeling study calculated that MCED screening could cut late-stage cancer diagnoses by more than half in the U.S. population aged 50 to 79. That would reduce five-year cancer mortality by 39 percent, resulting in a 26 percent reduction in overall cancer-related deaths.
Around 78 percent of all cancer cases are diagnosed after age 55 in the U.S. The Galleri test currently costs $949 and is not covered by private insurance or federal health care systems.
Cancer is the second leading cause of death in the U.S., but many other things can go wrong with your body. This is where a promising but very preliminary at-home micro-sampling blood test developed by Stanford geneticist Michael Snyder comes in. A study in the January issue of Nature Biomedical Engineering reported the results from a multiomics test developed by Snyder and his team, which measures thousands of proteins, lipids, and hormones from two drops of blood.
"I call it 'Theranos that works,'" Snyder quipped in The Stanford Daily, referring to the fraudulent blood-testing startup founded by Elizabeth Holmes. Snyder's test analyzes the molecules in blood samples using a combination of mass spectrometry (which identifies ionized molecules matched with a spectral database) and multiplexed immunoassays (which simultaneously measure molecules that attach to differently colored, antibody-coated magnetic beads).
The first of Snyder's two proof-of-concept experiments measured the changes in 2,000 known metabolites, lipids, and proteins (including cytokines) in the at-home blood microsamples of 28 people before and after they consumed a nutrient shake. The second experiment analyzed metabolite changes in hundreds of molecules in 98 blood microsamples collected for a week from a single person wearing a smartwatch and a continuous glucose monitor.
The clinical goal of frequent at-home blood microsample testing, according to Snyder and his Stanford Department of Genetics colleague Ryan Kellogg, is to "improve diagnostic precision and reduce the time taken to arrive at the optimal treatment." Snyder's research already has been used by the biotech startup Iollo, which has developed a test that measures more than 500 metabolites associated with inflammation and liver, kidney, and immune health as well as aging and longevity.
Soon comprehensive diagnostic testing advances like these will make it easy for people to monitor their health in real time. That information could enable them to ameliorate impending illnesses through preventive measures.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I am making a good salary from home $6580-$7065/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now it’s my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
Here is I started.……......>> http://WWW.RICHEPAY.COM
Very interesting and great if it works. It does seem that term cancer cover a pretty broad number of diseases and it also seem unlikely there is a one test fits all. But certainly, it would help to be able to detect any cancer earlier, particularly aggressive forms.
I’m making $90 an hour working from home. i was greatly surprised at the same time as my neighbour advised me she changed into averaging $100 however I see the way it works now. I experience mass freedom now that I’m my non-public boss.Everybody must try this job now by just using this website...
.
.
For Details►————————————➤ https://Www.Coins71.Com
If this lives up to the hype it seems like it would result in a noticeable increase in life expectancy.
I have made $18625 last month by w0rking 0nline from home in my part time only. Everybody can now get this j0b and start making dollars 0nline just by follow details here..
🙂 AND GOOD LUCK.:)
HERE====)> https://www.apprichs.com
If this lives up to the hype it seems like it would result in a noticeable increase in
life expectancyexpensive “treatments”.Just what the doctor ordered. A gizmo that will sky rocket medical care costs and hasten SS and medicare going broke by keeping everyone alive until the age of 99. Can Logan's Run be in our future?
Despite Bailey’s assertion, it’s still a pipe dream. And I say that as someone who spent more than 15 of the last 25 yrs. working on the two specifically-named detection technologies in the clinical space. Bailey is pretty straight up regurgitating the marketing execs’ sleight-of-hand on this. This specific “Develop an LDT and conflate its boutique performance with some future off-the-shelf tricorder-type device’s performance.” spiel is over 50 yrs. old and largely vaporware. Note that Bailey doesn’t name or describe any new technologies, immunoassays and mass spec are almost 75 and 100 yrs. old, respectively and magnetic bead separation is 50, just the same song and dance. Same Theranos, different day.
Maybe these guys are a little more honest than the last, but my personal laboratory-developed detection technology picks up significant amounts of “GRAIL”, “Silicon Valley”, and “Stanford”, which my proprietary algorithm reduces to a “not likely”.
So, are you saying “ more testing required ?
It reminds me of the surge of full body scans.
Full-body computed-tomography (CT) scans, which can cost $1,000, have been touted as a way to detect early signs of cancer and heart disease. However, the American College of Radiology warns that they can lead to costly and potentially risky follow-up exams to check out harmless abnormalities that otherwise would have gone undetected.
Spend thousands of dollars for a low reliability test requiring more tests.
Or the pull back for breast cancer testing due to the number of false positives.
So to sum up, Theranos also promised a Theranos that worked.
So how is it possible to have a clinical trial of a "pipe dream" on 140,000 participants??
Please elaborate, mad.casual.
Again, as I mentioned below, new technology always costs more at first, but goes down with innovations, competition, and no government subsidy and control. Medicine's big problem with being costly is precisely because of government control and third-party subsidy by Medicare/Medicaid.
The longer humans live, the better we can brace for the inevitable insolvency of SS and Medicare/Medicaid (which will happen anyway); and the longer we have to come up with Free-Market alternatives.
And Logan's Run can end up as comedy fodder for MST3K or RiffTrax
Joel: "I know the Hippies said 'Never Trust Anyone Over Thirty,' but this is a little harsh!"
Crow: "Hey, Gen-X Gramps! Is that a copy of Snow Crash in your hand? Come with us!"
This is great to have in the health sector https://bhrcdallas.com/iv-therapy/
Im making over $13k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.last month her pay check was $12712 just working on the laptop for a few hours. This is what I do,
…
VISIT THIS WEBSITE HERE……………….>>> http://www.works75.com
These are theoretically possible technologies. It's why Theranos got away with it for so long. The question is whether you will get so many false positives that the tests won't be worthwhile.
Theranos II, this time we mean it!
I like it!
Look, this isn't some Cambrian Genomics kickstarter spitballing about cat-sized dinosaurs and 10-story-tall apple trees. This is real science Ron supposedly paid for to talk about.
But does it stare at you with big unblinking eyes that compel you to invest in it?
And btw - imo - a potentially productive channel for researching how to reduce cancers is autophagy and other side effects of fasting.
As George Carlon said: "If I could reach, I'd never leave the house." 🙂
On a more serious note, caloric restriction has been shown to slow the aging process, presumably including immune functions in the body as well.
Also, I might add, I don’t know if this GRAIL company is on the level, but an Early Warning System for multiple types of cancer that works on the genetic and molecular level would be a great way to assist research in autophagy and caloric restriction, as well as all other factors that could go into fighting cancer before it metastasizes and factors that go into other genetically-caused conditions.
Best to take an approach of going with the evidence to see.
Although these screening tests are likely to be a huge improvement in medical care eventually, it would be wise to keep in mind that there is always a potential downside with medical screening. Since there is no such thing as a one hundred percent accurate test; and since the normal range of such tests is different for each kind of test and parameter tested; there will always be a few false positives and false negatives. The usual response to a positive screening test is to do more specific and more accurate testing to confirm the diagnosis and justify possible treatment recommendations. Remember that the important parameters are “positive predictive value” and “cost to save one life.” Popular science writers (and even some practitioners) frequently miss those points. Treating a positive test sometimes does more harm than good (prostate cancer in elderly men, for example.) I was told way back in med school that the more tests you do, the more likely it will be that at least one of them will be outside normal range. That has not changed since then.
All this is true. Omniscient knowledge is logically self-contradictory, since knowledge requires aquisition and verification. And Omniscience is contradictory of the larger context of how the Natural Universe and human Volition operate. Omniscience would mean a fixed Universe with a fixed future and humans unable to think or do anything within it.
However, for a profession based on the premise of furthering human life and health, lack of Omniscience is not and should not be a barrier. What humans can know and do know, humans should pursue and know, and humans should apply what knowledge they have towards fighting a monster that destroys human life.
And the one cancer that is 100 percent guaranteed to destroy is one which is never pursued, detected, or treated. Better to test and make correctable errors and take correctable courses of action than to not test, do nothing, and die an exceptionally agonizing, painful death.
As for the cost of saving a human life, that is always most expensive on the first try, as all new technology is. However, further research, further practice, new discoveries, unrestricted competition and no distortion of prices with control or subsidy can mean much lower costs later.
As always, must wait and see. If GRAIL doesn't succeed or is a fraud, someone else can come through...if not held back by dogma and/or force.
Agreed, and I was not arguing against screening. However, the "cost to save one life" is not really a monetary cost, it's the label for a much more complex criterion. It includes the concepts of how many tests you have to do on how many people to get one true positive test; how many positive screening tests you have to pursue to get one successful outcome; and how much harm you do in the process of achieving a successful outcome. In the public health realm it DOES include monetary costs: how many people does "society" have to spend $999 on to get one successful outcome on the average.
I fully agree here too. Evidence-based medicine should include judging the tests as well as the prognoses and the treatments by evidence. I sure hope GRAIL knows their stuff and puts it into action if it passes muster with reality.
Cancer hits on many fronts, sometimes all at once, sometimes from both sides of one's lineage, sometimes from toxic work and environment. A phalanx with shields and recon from all sides is sorely needed.
The Biomedical Testing Revolution Promises a Theranos That Actually Works
If Theranos does work this time, I hope the half of the Universe that disappears includes Spambots.
Oh wait...that's Thanos! Whoops! Wrong Universe. 😉
Im making over $13k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.last month her pay check was $12712 just working on the laptop for a few hours. This is what I do,
…
VISIT THIS WEBSITE HERE……………….>>> http://www.works75.com