The Daily Investigating the Prenatal Testing Market
Jan 4, 2022
Sarah Kliff, an investigative reporter for The New York Times specializing in healthcare and medical billing, sheds light on the booming but flawed prenatal testing market. She discusses alarming rates of false positives in tests for rare genetic disorders and the emotional toll it takes on expectant mothers. Kliff highlights the lack of regulation and informed decision-making in this rapidly evolving field. The conversation underscores the need for better support and transparency to empower parents navigating these complex testing landscapes.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
High False Positive Rates
- While most tests come back negative, the positive results for rarer conditions are often incorrect.
- The tests, marketed as highly accurate, have an 85% false-positive rate for several conditions.
Yael's False Positive
- Yael Geller, excited for her second child, received a positive test for Prader-Willi syndrome.
- This led to agonizing weeks, an invasive diagnostic test, and ultimately relief when the initial result proved false.
Lack of FDA Oversight
- Prenatal tests like these are exempt from FDA oversight, unlike other medical tests.
- This lack of regulation allows test makers to design studies, interpret data, and market their products without independent review.