New startup: Aperiomics testing 37,000 different pathogens in one test

[apod]

I came across a new startup from the perfecthealthdiet site: https://aperiomics.com -- This looks like a great step forward for broad infectious disease screening:

More than 75% of infections in the U.S. go undetected and millions of dollars are spent each year by patients on testing that too often completely fails patients.
Aperiomics has set out to change that. Today, with a single test using deep, unbiased sequencing and genomic analysis approaches, we can identify any known pathogen. We compare the complete genetic fingerprint of a sample to our own database of more than 32k+ microbes/pathogens, the largest database of its kind in the world.
Aperiomics is upending everything about the way in which infections are identified, completely changing the thinking about pathogen testing.

Jaminet writes:

This is a game-changing diagnostic tool. Infections are one of the leading causes of disease (along with bad diet and lifestyle), yet standard medical practice is unable to diagnose most infections. Many infections are treatable, but it’s not easy to treat something you can’t diagnose. Getting a clear and accurate diagnosis of infections and treating them appropriately, along with healthy diet and lifestyle practices such as those recommended in Perfect Health Diet, holds the promise of curing most diseases.

[circular]

I came across a new startup from the perfecthealthdiet site: https://aperiomics.com -- This looks like a great step forward for broad infectious disease screening...

Thanks, interesting future ahead there! They say toward the end of their FAQ that they're working on delivering antibiotic susceptibility reports too. That'll probably increase the cost (?), but is pretty important information once you know what you're infected with.

I'm a bit concerned this could lead to a lot of over-treatment of infections that aren't really the cause of any physical issues, and I suspect there will be a lot of debate about what to treat and what not to treat. Afterall, are we pretty much swimming in a microorganism pool? I suppose the ones that are found in much higher numbers will be the most helpful, those in between may lead to a lot of angst over what to do, while small numbers might be disregarded.

I found this comparison of using DNA over cultures informative:

Culture is a 100+ year old technology that is limited to identifying only what will grow in culture. Given that many microorganisms will not grow in culture, this technology is dramatically limited in the number of microorganisms that can be identified. Culture creates bias because just one bacterial cell can grow and render a sample positive for that bacteria, irrespective of if that bacteria is causing an active infection. Additionally, culture does not allow for consistent, objective identification of microorganisms to the species level.