The funny thing here, is that barring lab errors, which I think are highly unlikely unless they are being incredibly shoddy, which would take effort, the information that 23andMe provides is very reliable
That's the point of certification - is the process reliable? Are the warnings clear? I won't cast any aspersions on the product (because it's pretty awesome), but I do see these as risks and requirements.
Could you explain a scenario where basing life and health decisions on 23andMe's product could lead to sickness and death?
"I've got all these symptoms of diabetes. But 23andme said I had a low risk! It's probably nothing. Guess I'll eat another pie."
If 23andme has shoddy lab practices, or unclear explanation of the limitation of their testing, then that's a risk. The process of certification involves managing that risk.
That's the point of certification - is the process reliable? Are the warnings clear? I won't cast any aspersions on the product (because it's pretty awesome), but I do see these as risks and requirements.
Could you explain a scenario where basing life and health decisions on 23andMe's product could lead to sickness and death?
"I've got all these symptoms of diabetes. But 23andme said I had a low risk! It's probably nothing. Guess I'll eat another pie."
If 23andme has shoddy lab practices, or unclear explanation of the limitation of their testing, then that's a risk. The process of certification involves managing that risk.