You don't appreciate the cultural undertones of what is being said. I assume you will also like the following quote from the same government official in regard to ACTA: "We should never put copy rights ahead of human rights".

Now let me translate these statements for you: "Gee, we did not realize that we can ask for bigger bribes. Now go back and stuff a little more cash into that envelope."

What happened is that being completely clueless about the dynamics of the issue, the government assumed this something that nobody cares about and going along with the flow will procure them some minor favors with the EU bureaucracies and the Bulgarian equivalents of RIAA. Because of the protests, they realized that this is actually a controversial issue, which provides them with a strong bargaining position as far as 'lobbyist' money are concerned.

Really? So if I run a Ponzi scheme and you cluelessly hand me your money, the government should stay away and not infringe on your right to get robbed?

This is a moronic summary of a stupid article. This is not about FDA regulating your stem cells, it is about FDA regulating snake oil salesmen, before somebody gets hurt.

Some schmuck finds a loophole in the law that allows him to perform for profit untested medical procedures with questionable (to put it mildly) outcome. FDA has two options:

1. Ignore him and when somebody gets hurt get dragged to congress as a showpiece of a useless government bureaucracy.

2. Cover their bases and use all (no mater how questionable) authority that it can muster to try to shut him down.

Option one is a loosing proposition. Option two is a win-win no-matter how the court decides. If the court allows this to fly (unlikely) they win. If the court laughs at their arguments (more likely) they have covered their asses big time. Now they can turn to congress and say 'We have done what we can, it is your turn now to decide if this should be regulated'. In addition, at any point in the future when a similar situation pops up they are absolved from responsibility.

Can you build a Beowulf cluster if a B52 carpet bombs you with these?

He was referring to the poster's handle, rather than his politeness.

Besides, Nobody expects the Spanish inquisition!

The GM labeling is a little fuzzy according to this site http://www.innvista.com/health/foods/organics/labeling.htm:

Wow! These were the times, when we cared about chrome dioxide tapes. Then the CDs came bout and everything went downhill. Seriously, this is one of the largest chemical companies in the world. you don't here about them, because they no longer market to consumers, at least in the US. But if you need 100 metric tons of a pigment, or a polymer, or any other chemical they are the guys to go to.

Your car analogy is not very appropriate. To begin with I have been riding the automobile in question for couple of years, and its predecessors (microarrays) for about 10 years. You are completely missing the point that the problem here is not the amount of information that a doctor can potentially get from the full genome sequencing. The problem is that at the current state of the art we are unable to digest this information to a point where a doctor can act on it. The reason is that once you go beyond the simple Mendelian genetics, the interactions between different factors become exceedingly complex. You need to take into account multistate interactions of the genome sequence with epigenetic and environmental factors. In addition, having the genomic sequence will not solve your problem of not knowing what to look for. It will tell you even less about what kind of infection you have. In this case we don't really need to use the latest gadget to replace cheap, fast and reliable immunology tests? Kind of reminds me about the machine that says 'BING'.

As it stands now, doctors have more information that they can process. So if your are looking for a revolution that is just starting look at technologies for integrating large amounts of 'fuzzy' information from patient records, medical textbooks and literature, and various medical test to produce accurate diagnosis. Technologies like IBMs Watson and the NIH sponsored i2b2 is the next big thing in medical care.

You can get the answer if it is genetic now. So going back to the original comment: What are you and your doctor are going to do about it??

You hit the nail on the head. There is very little if any useful information for a doctor in full genome sequence, and most of it can be obtained with much cheaper genetic tests. ABI is ramping up the hype because they really need this instrument to be a good seller. Their first bet in the field was on a sequencing by ligation machine (SOLID) which did not sell very well.

Correction: It is not cheaper that current tech and will not increase assay density or performance. The only advantage over most current tests is that it can be used for continuous monitoring of ATP levels in living cells, but I can't find anything that substantiates their claim that it is not toxic. So nothing new here, move along.