2013 Nordestgaard: Genetic testing is not a step in a procedure, it is an alternative procedure

Let’s look again at the industry’s most influential report. This report is also led by one of the authors of the 1st and 2nd Danish reports. In brief, the scoring systems and genetic testing find mostly different people.  An important element of the publication strategy is not to eliminate genetic testing; the reports, funded by the industry, only advocate the demotion of genetic testing, while preserving scoring systems as if they were sufficient and of the highest priority. Once the two methods are no longer regarded as two steps to a single procedure, they can be presented as alternative procedures. The industry will then get the best of both worlds.  Critically, the scoring systems are more profitable than genetic testing: first, because it is easier to apply the scoring systems; second, because there are more non-FH who will be named FH than otherwise; and third, because most of the genuine FH are actually milder than previously thought, undermining the case for prescriptions but also undermining the marketing message of “danger” and “urgency.”

2013 Nordestgaard: Genetic testing is not a step in a procedure, it is an alternative procedure