Do CF centers use ambry?
- Thread starter auntcob
- Start date
CHOP used to use Ambry. They now use Genzyme and will test for 1000+ but I believe it's only if they don't first find 2 mutations in one of the more common panel tests. On the Genzyme form they can check to continue testing further if one or none mutations are found.
When I asked why they no longer used Ambry. I got an answer to the effect of that Ambry was finding mutations in lots of people and they didn't know what to tell all these mildly or symptomless effected folks.
I guess it's annoying to be at the forfront of science and discovery
...and probably expensive
Sort of makes you wonder if there was ever a true testing of carrier status done on the population just what the accurate incidence of cf mutations would be, eh?
When I asked why they no longer used Ambry. I got an answer to the effect of that Ambry was finding mutations in lots of people and they didn't know what to tell all these mildly or symptomless effected folks.
I guess it's annoying to be at the forfront of science and discovery
...and probably expensive Sort of makes you wonder if there was ever a true testing of carrier status done on the population just what the accurate incidence of cf mutations would be, eh?
CHOP used to use Ambry. They now use Genzyme and will test for 1000+ but I believe it's only if they don't first find 2 mutations in one of the more common panel tests. On the Genzyme form they can check to continue testing further if one or none mutations are found.
When I asked why they no longer used Ambry. I got an answer to the effect of that Ambry was finding mutations in lots of people and they didn't know what to tell all these mildly or symptomless effected folks.
I guess it's annoying to be at the forfront of science and discovery ...and probably expensive
Sort of makes you wonder if there was ever a true testing of carrier status done on the population just what the accurate incidence of cf mutations would be, eh?
When I asked why they no longer used Ambry. I got an answer to the effect of that Ambry was finding mutations in lots of people and they didn't know what to tell all these mildly or symptomless effected folks.
I guess it's annoying to be at the forfront of science and discovery
...and probably expensive Sort of makes you wonder if there was ever a true testing of carrier status done on the population just what the accurate incidence of cf mutations would be, eh?
CHOP used to use Ambry. They now use Genzyme and will test for 1000+ but I believe it's only if they don't first find 2 mutations in one of the more common panel tests. On the Genzyme form they can check to continue testing further if one or none mutations are found.
When I asked why they no longer used Ambry. I got an answer to the effect of that Ambry was finding mutations in lots of people and they didn't know what to tell all these mildly or symptomless effected folks.
I guess it's annoying to be at the forfront of science and discovery ...and probably expensive
Sort of makes you wonder if there was ever a true testing of carrier status done on the population just what the accurate incidence of cf mutations would be, eh?
When I asked why they no longer used Ambry. I got an answer to the effect of that Ambry was finding mutations in lots of people and they didn't know what to tell all these mildly or symptomless effected folks.
I guess it's annoying to be at the forfront of science and discovery
...and probably expensive Sort of makes you wonder if there was ever a true testing of carrier status done on the population just what the accurate incidence of cf mutations would be, eh?
CHOP used to use Ambry. They now use Genzyme and will test for 1000+ but I believe it's only if they don't first find 2 mutations in one of the more common panel tests. On the Genzyme form they can check to continue testing further if one or none mutations are found.
When I asked why they no longer used Ambry. I got an answer to the effect of that Ambry was finding mutations in lots of people and they didn't know what to tell all these mildly or symptomless effected folks.
I guess it's annoying to be at the forfront of science and discovery ...and probably expensive
Sort of makes you wonder if there was ever a true testing of carrier status done on the population just what the accurate incidence of cf mutations would be, eh?
When I asked why they no longer used Ambry. I got an answer to the effect of that Ambry was finding mutations in lots of people and they didn't know what to tell all these mildly or symptomless effected folks.
I guess it's annoying to be at the forfront of science and discovery
...and probably expensive Sort of makes you wonder if there was ever a true testing of carrier status done on the population just what the accurate incidence of cf mutations would be, eh?
CHOP used to use Ambry. They now use Genzyme and will test for 1000+ but I believe it's only if they don't first find 2 mutations in one of the more common panel tests. On the Genzyme form they can check to continue testing further if one or none mutations are found.
<br />
<br />When I asked why they no longer used Ambry. I got an answer to the effect of that Ambry was finding mutations in lots of people and they didn't know what to tell all these mildly or symptomless effected folks.
<br />
<br />I guess it's annoying to be at the forfront of science and discovery ...and probably expensive
<br />
<br />Sort of makes you wonder if there was ever a true testing of carrier status done on the population just what the accurate incidence of cf mutations would be, eh?
<br />
<br />When I asked why they no longer used Ambry. I got an answer to the effect of that Ambry was finding mutations in lots of people and they didn't know what to tell all these mildly or symptomless effected folks.
<br />
<br />I guess it's annoying to be at the forfront of science and discovery
...and probably expensive <br />
<br />Sort of makes you wonder if there was ever a true testing of carrier status done on the population just what the accurate incidence of cf mutations would be, eh?