Common questions
What is the biological material required for the test? To get the DNA, we require a saliva sample.
What are the steps for this test? Saliva is taken from the customer in the laboratory (laboratories) of our Romanian partners. These laboratories are accredited according to Romanian legislation. The Romanian partner extracts the DNA from these samples, after which DNA samples are sent to their own sequencing laboratories or collaborating institutions (United States of America). Data from DNA sequencing is sent to Advanced Nutrigenomics (USA), which develops a customized nutrigenetic report on this basis. This report is sent to the Romanian collaborator who in turn sends it to the client and, if possible, to the specialist with whom he collaborates.
I have learned that several nutrigenetic tests are offered on the Romanian market by several companies. How can I decide which t At first glance it is difficult, if not impossible, for a person without training in this area to make a decision. These tests are not cheap, and their results may depend on your health due to the decisions you can take from these tests. It is advisable to consult with a specialist (nutritionist, nutritionist, etc.) or the laboratory of one of our Romanian collaborators before ordering this test. For example, this test can more accurately determine your nutritional needs and as such will give you a report that will suggest the recommended amounts for each nutrient. On the other hand, this test, like any other genetic test (with some rare exceptions for monogenic diseases), can not in itself ensure that you are protected from a certain disease, or that you will become ill sure of a certain illness. However, nutrigenetic tests can help you change your lifestyle, including your diet, to minimize certain disease risks. Therefore nutrigenetic tests can not be considered as diagnostic tests.
Why does the gene list and genetic variation differ between different tests on the market? Is not the science interpreted by all Ideally, scientists with similar knowledge should come to similar conclusions. In other words, the nutrigenetic tests offered should include lists of genes and similar genetic variations. In fact, this is not the case. The main strength behind the design and delivery of these tests is the financial interest. This would not be a problem if the field of nutrigenetics were also standardized in terms of formal recognition of these specialists. Unfortunately, in Europe or in other countries (eg the USA), nutrigenetics is not yet considered an independent specialty. The consequences are important because, at this time, anyone can call himself a nutrigenetic specialist. In this sense, people with a few summer courses can call themselves "Nutrigeneticians," although the attainment of Nutrigenetic performance requires years of structured study in the fields of biochemistry, physiology, molecular biology, genetics, nutrition, and related fields. Practically, a nutrigenetic specialist should be assessed according to a number of criteria widely accepted by the scientific community: The activity studied and at what level (usually doctorate - PhD or / and medical specialty) - attention to the subject / field of doctoral studies. In general, master studies are not sufficient to achieve performance in this area. Scientific activity, recognized in various circumstances (publications and subject of research), participation in "peer-review" processes for grants, journals, etc. A good start for those who have time to search for information is the PubMed database where, using authors' names, you can access the list of available publications. In practice, most tests are designed by people who do not have the necessary knowledge to interpret the correlations in the various available studies, nor have the ability to filter scientifically solid information (discoveries) from those that are still at the hypothesis stage. All of these factors have, unfortunately, given that there are very large qualitative differences and interpretations in a nutritional context between the nutrigenetic tests on the market.
What is the difference between different methods of determining genetic variation? There are 3 major categories for identifying genetic variations: a) PCR ("polymerase chain reaction") in which, in one tube, one can identify up to three different genetic variations (hereinafter referred to as "multiplexing"); b. "Micro-array" platforms, which essentially represent multiple PCR reactions on a chip, or independent DNA synthesis reactions (technology allowing miniaturization of these chemical reactions); c) Sequencing methods, in which 200-400 nucleotide long DNA chains are sequenced based on the base in turn. One of the major differences between methods a) and b) and c) sequencing, respectively, is that the sequencing method allows much more iterations (repeats) of the DNA sequence identification reaction, compared to the PCR and micro- array. Why is this important for a genetic (or nutrigenetic) test? The more numerous these iterations (that is replications of the same chemical reaction to identify genetic variations), the more robust the results are. Generally, genetic variation identification (genotyping) reactions, regardless of the method used, have a probability of success of 85-90%. In other words, running a single genotyping reaction will yield 85-90% true results. This means that because the probability of failure (false positive or false negative results) is close to 0%, the same genotyping reaction must be run several times. For example, the success rate of 100 responses will be 85. For 85 times the same result was generated, while false results were generated in only 15 responses. In contrast, if a single genotyping reaction is run, the chances of failure are 1 in 6. This means that if I test six people using a single reaction to each, a 6th individual will generate a false result. This limitation is inevitable, and comes from how chemical reactions take place - never with 100% accuracy. In practice, this limitation is solved by repeating the reaction several times, until the probability of repeating the error approaches 0% and becomes negligible. Due to the costs involved, the PCR method generally uses 3 replicates (3 iterations), ie the reaction is run separately 3 times. Under these conditions, the probability that the error will repeat 3 times in a row (ie genotyping to produce an erroneous and unidentified result as such) is: 0.15 x 0.15 x 0.15 = 0.34%. This means that out of 1,000 people tested, erroneous results (unidentified as such) will exist for 3.4 people. In the case of micro-array methods, there are several iterations (generally less than 10), allowing even greater error reduction. In the case of sequencing, the probability of error is reduced even more, since it is already routine to have a 100-1000x depth of sequencing (ie 100-1000 iterations), which has made the sequencing a standard for genotyping. The Advanced NGx test uses the sequencing method with a depth of at least 100x (mean value).
How is my physician involved? All Color tests are ordered by a physician—either your own or an independent physician. If you authorize an independent physician to order your testing, one from an external network will receive and use your information to review your eligibility and order testing on your behalf. When your results are ready, they will be sent to the ordering physician, as well as any additional providers you select.
Open a new question
    Send question