This story reports on mail-order blood tests that purport to determine a person’s “cellular age” by measuring the length of telomeres, the DNA caps at the ends of chromosomes that protect against deterioration and fusion with neighboring chromosomes.
The news story does a good job of listing the many limitations of this test—it’s a very strong point of the story. Yet, it draws readers in at the start with fear-mongering and fails to mention obvious alternatives of monitoring your weight and fitness level and seeing a doctor for regular check-ups. Moreover it’s not clear there’s any real news here, since telomere testing has been around in some form for years.
There’s no evidence that measuring telomere length can be useful in guiding health decisions. Yet there are plenty of companies willing to sell consumers on the idea anyway while conveying a bogus message that the normal aging process constitutes a disease. Stories like this one are a mixed bag: Even if they spell out the limitations, they give publicity to an unproven product.
The story mentions these tests are available for $89, and that a company also charges $395 to get the panel of all 92 telomeres.
The story provides some quantification (via a discussion of a prostate cancer study) but overall clearly establishes that there is a lack of benefit.
The story could have pointed out that because the significance of telomere length is unclear, people who take the test may either get a false sense of a security from learning they compare favorably to the general population or experience unnecessary anxiety if they get a lower-than-average result.
The story very wisely included this paragraph:
“Critics say the few controlled trials that show people can lengthen their telomeres are very small and the large observational studies that make up the bulk of the scientific literature on telomeres don’t demonstrate cause and effect.”
We also learn that “some top telomere scientists say such information amounts to little more than high-tech palm reading, in part because telomere length varies so widely in the general population that it isn’t clear what length is problematic.”
It also states that telomere length can’t tell you how long you’ll live, that there’s little research on whether telomeres can be lengthened with healthy habits, and that most people “never reach the end of their telomeres, and some scientists say they have to be extremely short before they contribute to disease.”
We wish some of the skepticism expressed in the body of this piece had made it to the top. Instead, readers are drawn in with scary statements along with exaggerations of the test’s capabilities. The headline states the tests “check for signs of early aging,” as if aging were a disease, and that companies claim the tests “can signal disease risk and a need to take corrective measures.” The first paragraph continues the alarming tone, stating that “your cells might be aging faster than you are.”
This story wins points for reaching out to multiple independent experts, including a Nobel Prize winner who helped discover how telomeres protect chromosomes.
Most people over the age of 50 would be vastly better off following prudent health advice and visiting their doctor to discuss whether they should to be screened for specific treatable conditions such as high blood pressure, diabetes, breast cancer, high cholesterol, hypothyroidism or colorectal cancer, to name a few. The story doesn’t mention that.
The story mentions that these tests are available through the mail from a number of companies.
It’s misleading to call these “new tests.” Commercial telomere testing is dates back at least to 2005, according to one report.
The story does not appear to rely on a news release.
Systematic, Criteria-Driven
@HealthNewsRevu "There’s no harm in trying to make a buck, per se. But there is harm in promoting things that are not backed up by evidence, and in converting normal states of health into sickness" https://t.co/aeUTK4CVAs
Men’s Health Month: "Some of it was thinly-veiled, profit-driven fear-mongering," says @garyschwitzer: https://t.co/MOWdxlenvz
Comments
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
Our Comments Policy
But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.
You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.
This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.
We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.
There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”
The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:
We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.
And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.
The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.
You might also like