Launch HN: Iollo (YC S22) – At-home metabolomics test to extend healthy lifespan

167 points by danielgomari ↗ HN
Hi Hacker News! We’re Dan, Jan, and Brent from iollo (https://www.iollo.com/). We’re developing an at-home metabolomics test that measures hundreds of “metabolites” in blood, which studies have shown can inform about health status, disease risk, dietary patterns, and physical activity. We will then provide evidence-based dietary, behavioral, and therapeutic treatments to help extend the number of years you’re disease-free (your “healthspan”).

Today’s healthcare system is reactive, meaning diseases are treated only after symptoms are present. By the time they are detected, they’re often already serious issues that require irreversible interventions, like taking lifelong medications and living with their side effects. Collectively, we end up spending trillions of dollars treating diseases reactively that can often be prevented with good health monitoring and management. Also, a lot of age-related diseases develop as a result of molecular imbalances that accumulate over years.

One scientific field where many of these molecules can be measured is called metabolomics. Having worked in this field for more than a decade, we know that the technology exists to detect potential signs of chronic conditions at the earliest stages, when they are most actionable. Dan has a PhD and did his postdoctoral research at Stanford in computational biology and metabolomics. His work covers healthspan extension, lifespan extension and machine learning-based tools for drug repurposing. Jan, who was Dan’s PhD thesis supervisor, is a professor of computational biomedicine and metabolomics at Cornell. He has published over 90 metabolomics-related papers, with a focus on age-related chronic diseases, such as cancer, type 2 diabetes, and Alzheimer’s disease. Brent was the co-founder of Circle Medical, a primary care provider via video and in-person.

The “metabolome” is defined as the complete set of small molecules found in biological organisms with a size of <1,500 Dalton, also known as metabolites [1][2]. This comprises biochemical substances such as amino acids, nucleic acids, fatty acids, vitamins, and hormones, as well as external chemicals like drugs, environmental contaminants, food additives, toxins [3][4] and metabolites produced by the gut microbiome. As of 2022, over 200,000 metabolites have been identified in nature, 40,000 of which are in blood, and over 1,500,000 are expected to still be identified (what we call the dark metabolome) [5].

The same way that fasting glucose has a baseline, other metabolites in blood, like the ~600 that we measure, also have their own baseline and deviations from these baselines have implications for your overall health and aging [6]. Compared to genetic testing, which tells people what might happen to their health, metabolomics tells us exactly what is happening in a body right now. Recent studies have shown links between blood metabolites and the risk or presence of various systemic diseases, including diabetes, heart disease, and Alzheimer’s disease; see for example [7].

Here are a few examples of what the first generation of iollo reports will include:

(1) The food a person eats and what actually ends up in their blood are not always the same thing. This is related to the concept of “bioavailability”, which differs from person to person. For example, people with impaired sugar transporters in the gut will not experience the same spike of blood sugar as people with a normal receptor (side note: this is not always a good thing, since sugars that remain in the gut lead to IBD-like problems). Our technology measures various markers of food intake, for example of red meat and plant-based diets, that can show what actually ended up in your blood. This can help guide dietary recommendations and healthy lifestyles.

(2) Your personal rate of aging. Research has shown that there is a “biological age”, which might differ from a person’s actual, chronological age. People who are...

148 comments

[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 258 ms ] thread
References:

[1] Wishart DS. Metabolomics for Investigating Physiological and Pathophysiological Processes. Physiol Rev. 2019 Oct 1;99(4):1819–75. https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/physrev.000...

[2] Wishart DS, Tzur D, Knox C, Eisner R, Guo AC, Young N, et al. HMDB: the Human Metabolome Database. Nucleic Acids Res. 2007 Jan;35(Database issue):D521-526. https://academic.oup.com/nar/article/35/suppl_1/D521/1109186

[3] Wishart DS. Current progress in computational metabolomics. Brief Bioinform. 2007 Sep;8(5):279–93. https://academic.oup.com/bib/article/8/5/279/217981

[4] Nordström A, O’Maille G, Qin C, Siuzdak G. Nonlinear data alignment for UPLC-MS and HPLC-MS based metabolomics: quantitative analysis of endogenous and exogenous metabolites in human serum. Anal Chem. 2006 May 15;78(10):3289–95. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ac060245f

[5] Wishart DS, Guo A, Oler E, Wang F, Anjum A, Peters H, et al. HMDB 5.0: the Human Metabolome Database for 2022. Nucleic Acids Research. 2022 Jan 7;50(D1):D622–31. https://academic.oup.com/nar/article/50/D1/D622/6431815

[6] Ahadi, Sara, et al. "Personal aging markers and ageotypes revealed by deep longitudinal profiling." Nature Medicine 26.1 (2020): 83-90. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-019-0719-5

[7] Pietzner, Maik, et al. "Plasma metabolites to profile pathways in noncommunicable disease multimorbidity." Nature medicine 27.3 (2021): 471-479. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01266-0

[8] Merino, Jordi, et al. "Metabolomics insights into early type 2 diabetes pathogenesis and detection in individuals with normal fasting glucose." Diabetologia 61.6 (2018): 1315-1324. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29626220/

[9] Wang, Thomas J., et al. "Metabolite profiles and the risk of developing diabetes." Nature medicine 17.4 (2011): 448-453. https://www.nature.com/articles/nm.2307

Congratulations on the launch! I've always been fascinated by metabolomics, but it felt like such a complex data problem. What sort of recommendations will you make based on my results? How did you develop the recommendations?
Thanks! Right now, the recommendation we'd be providing will be based on published studies that are known to positively impact the metabolome and health. We match your metabolomic profile, based on the deviations we see, with recommendations that could benefit your metabolome the most. For example some well-studied interventions that we could match you with include the DASH diet [1] (which reduces the risk for heart disease), fasting [2, 3], targeted physical activity [4], and soon, statin intake [5], metformin [6] medication (which has been shown to extend healthspan), and many more. As you build your metabolomic trends when you test over time, we'll also be able to train personalized ML models for you and give you better and better recommendations that you'll actually respond to.

References:

[1] https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/108/2/243/5038205

[2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6412259/

[3] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32931723/

[4] https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(20)30508-0

[5] https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCGENETICS.117.001...

[6] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8508882/

We’re developing an at-home metabolomics test that measures hundreds of “metabolites” in blood, which studies have shown can inform about health status, disease risk, dietary patterns, and physical activity.

Just for my own clarification, when you say at-home do you mean that the kit will diagnose the patient at home, or that they will gather samples at home and mail them to you?

Clearly the latter, from the text above:

How it works: We send you a blood collection device ... and it gets express-shipped directly to the metabolomics lab.

^. What they wrote is kind if misleading. You still have to send it over.
By at-home we mean that the person will gather samples at home and mail them to us.
Thank you for the clarification. As neonate mentioned I should have figured that out from further down the post. I get a little excited when I see these posts because I have been waiting for smaller and less expensive diagnostic devices in this field.
I’m having an annual physical this month where blood samples are taken from my arm at my medical system’s lab attached to the PCP’s office. Could I have additional blood drawn during my physical and send it with the process you have? Or would I have to specially use your collection device?

(Interested in purchasing your service and sending in a sample from my physical)

Unfortunately, it has to be through our collection device. Blood usually has to be cooled on ice to be shipped. At room temperature (in the mail), you need the stabilizing sponge that our blood device has.
Congrats on the launch! We need more folks trying to bring the tricoder to reality. I knew about DNA-methylation but this novel way seems more apt for scale.
This is exciting technology. Something I want but that does not exist is being able to test your blood with your own personal device without sending any of the data or blood over to private corporations. The corporations only sell the software.

You'd be able to download different programs that analyze your current health state from blood, or any other marker. The device would be able to tell if you are at risk for any disease just from a common set of samples.

I know this is kind of unrealistic, because to make better programs you need data from people. But who knows. Maybe one day we'll get there.

This may be what you are looking for: https://www.bloomdiagnostics.com/
Their site says they will only ship to Austria, Germany, or Italy, and you have to promise you're a medical professional to even get to checkout (I don't know whether it's further enforced if you do have an address they ship to.)
How can consumers feel confident that the insights they're getting are backed by legitimate research? (In other words, how are you escaping the perception that this is Theranos 2.0?)
Every piece of information reported to the users will be presented in a digestible way. This will include both, hard scientific evidence but also a lay version of what it means. If you want to, you will be able to look up and verify everything yourself. We will also make sure to draw the line between definitive statements ("this measurement means you are sick") and suggestive statements ("this might mean something, go see a doctor") in order to not oversell anything.
Thank you for sharing. What marketing strategies are you considering to ensure consumer trust is your top value when you go to market?
Everybody thought Theranos was legitimate too. No way for consumers to tell.

There's so much fluff and scams in this industry, YC isn't exactly above it either. ex) coinbase

Maybe this is legitimate maybe its not. We have no way of knowing.

The difference is that we will disclose and publish as much of the science behind the product as possible, while Theranos was all promises, no delivery.
Theranos did bog standard lab tests, drawing blood from a vein the old fashioned way, “surprise we have a needle! i thought… nope neeeedle!” then cocked them up in the lab, and used standard lab equipment instead of some mac cube lookalike designed to woo investors. So their case had nothing to do with legitimate research vs. not, but just a scammy scummy company overall.
Great idea. Huge longevity freak here. But why are you developing two things? 1. the blood extractor and 2. the test data processing. Seems like the blood extractor is way riskier/complex and unnecessary part of the main point. Unless your main point is blood extraction for numerous other tests.
Thanks and great question. The extractor already exists. It has already been developed and is actively being used in studies at Stanford, Cornell, pharma and other institutions. We are using this collection technology to obtain blood in a pain-free and stable way. Our main R&D is in the data extraction, processing, and analysis.
> Moreover, every bit of information that we communicate to the users will be heavily backed by scientific evidence which we disclose in the delivered reports.

Will it be possible to contact people with similar profiles to create new scientific evidence? E.g. if some marker is too low, it would be nice to work with others with the same problem to figure out how to increase the value.

This is an excellent idea. Community engagement is something we have definitely thought about and is now part of our roadmap. Matchmaking between people could add an interesting level of communication and exchange. We will need to make sure to address any possible privacy concerns, and we'll be working on it.
This ^^

For all the privacy concerns, I'd love to be able to opt to waive them / opt in to groups of people with similar results and exchange notes / personal findings.

And would love to contribute to medical research in a way that's less onerous on researchers.

And of course there'd be some misunderstandings - consumer beware...

"Your personal rate of aging. Research has shown that there is a “biological age”, which might differ from a person’s actual, chronological age. People who are biologically older than their real age tend to develop more health-related issues and age-related problems compared to people who are biologically young. Our platform will provide the users with estimates of their biological age, as well as their personal rate of aging across repeated time points and potential recommendations to slow down this rate."

I question whether it's emotionally healthy for all users to have a direct measure of their aging to this degree. If I were a customer, I'd prefer to receive the actionable advice (the "how to decrease this rate of aging") without knowing the exact rate or my rate relative to the average. Especially if there were aspects outside of my control. If some other thing shows up as actionable but there's not really much in the metabolite data relevant to aging rate, cool - show me that stuff instead. If the data does show there are actions that I should take to reduce rate of aging, cool - recommend me those actions.

Certainly not saying one shouldn't be able to get at this data from your service, but that perhaps it should be an onboarding option to not receive that level of granularity.

Yes, we agree that being confronted with a health issue without any way to go forward would be emotionally stressful. For aging specifically, the good news is that an overall healthy lifestyle (diet, exercise, sleep) appears to slow the biological aging process. So, if we report an accelerated aging rate to you, this could also serve as a simple wake-up call to do something.

The idea of masking certain aspects with different levels of granularity during onboarding and according to each person's comfort level is excellent. We will take this into consideration.

Awesome to hear, sounds like you get that that could be an issue for users with feelings of struggling to control their health or wanting to optimize it and feeling powerless with regards to aging and mortality.

I'll just say, that even IF you can provide actionable advice to improve things, I still wouldn't want a number or quantifiable thing regarding aging rate. Something like sleep quality or weight change is more indirect and I feel fine knowing the stats. But with actual aging, not even sure I'd want the boolean 'you are experiencing accelerated aging' vs 'you are no longer experiencing accelerated aging' or 'you aren't experiencing accelerated aging'.

Like, look at something like Apple Health that prompts the user to try to get in their daily steps. Or an app reminding an elderly person to stand up every hour. Or to look away from their screen.

Those reminders could secretly be informed by the patient's health markers, but the patient need not think about that or their raw score.

I think the value I'd find in a service like Iollo is getting targeted advice/actions dependent on my own metabolically problematic markers - maybe Iollo's advice changes whether I have sleep issues or hormone problems or eating too much or am smoking cigarettes - and to have those actions/advice change over time dynamically as new input / measurements are received by your systems, as opposed to seeing a line graph showing me just how much I fucked up my body in April when I was grieving a loss of a parent with sleepness nights and hitting the whiskey a bit too hard, just yielding more anxiety and self-recrimination.

On the other hand - I wouldn't mind seeing congratulations or seeing Iollo prove that positive steps I took are resulting in improvements. So maybe Iollo telling me that I did a stellar job in improving measures of cardiovascular health over the last 30-90 trailing days, allowing me to feel like I accomplished something by improving habits.

We hear you. You are talking about positive reinforcement rather than negative feedback. And about gradual, quantitative information rather than hard calls on "good" and "bad". Your thoughts are very valuable here, we will take all of this into consideration.
Clicked through with intent to buy. Abandoned on recurring charge and too many offerings.
In 2013 FDA shut down 23andMe's direct-to-consumer reports because they said consumers would misunderstand genetic information and "self treat". FWIW I thought this was a dumb decision and feel lucky that I was grandfathered in to some helpful reports before the FDA put the kibosh on them.

Do you think this is a risk to you? How will you deal with the FDA?

In general, it's good that the FDA is holding companies to a certain standard. We're currently running our tests under an IRB and this is actually one of the first steps for us to have enough data to start our application to the FDA.
> At no time shall your Personal Information, including blood or metabolomic data collected from you in accordance with this Privacy Policy be deemed to be an electronic health record or an electronic medical record for any purpose, including without limitation for the purpose of compliance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.

Does this mean you other medical professionals can't get the data / records of these tests?

It just means that you are the owner of the data.

If you want to have your data, you can download them at any time and share them with anyone you want.

If you want us to delete the data, we will do that.

If you don't say anything, we will never share your data with anyone.

I appreciate what you are trying to say (I think) but the way this is presented seems to contradict previous statement.

> The resulting data is then securely sent over to us (we’re HIPAA compliant)

So the material is considered and under the protection of HIPAA.

> At no time shall your Personal Information, including blood or metabolomic data collected from you in accordance with this Privacy Policy be deemed to be an electronic health record or an electronic medical record for any purpose, including without limitation for the purpose of compliance with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.

This reads like 'because we do not consider your data to be PHI, therefore it is not under HIPAA.' ergo, lose all HIPAA protection.

Might want to re-write this if that is not what you meant.

I've seen this literature used before, you can make such a claim if you are a transmitter of data, e.g. a SMS carrier. However this would certainly fall flat on its face if you were a actual EHR / EMR.
The legal language here can indeed be confusing. EHR and PHI are not the same thing. What is important is that your personal information will not be shared with anyone. We will make sure that the language on our webpage is more concise, thank you for pointing this out.
I also read that as “we can sell this data”.

The thing you need to remember with consumer protection is that a failing company will abandon everything including ethics in order to pay the piper. Especially after they have laid you off.

There’s a reason some capital E ethical companies put poison pills or time bombs in their charter. Booby traps of this sort actually instill trust in people who have heard a line of bullshit so often they can see it a mile away.

HIPAA only covers business associates, covered entities and subcontractors. I’m guessing this company is neither of those three. Therefore the “PHI” you provide to them, is not “PHI” under HIPAA since you are providing the data, and not a covered entity.
It would be more reassuring for you to explain exactly how you do use the data. Are you training neural networks, even with aggregated/anonymised data? Are you creating synthetic data?

I'd be specifically interested in exactly how you "delete" data after the user requests this, and how you ensure that any data breach could not reveal identifying information. Perhaps HIPAA covers some or all of this, I'm not sure. But personally I'd want extremely detailed reassurance about these items.

This sounds very interesting and I am tempted to sign up. But the biggest worry for me is the privacy of the data. There is a mention on the website that data isn't shared without consent. But that can always change in the future once VCs get involved and they are trying to maximize revenue. Or the business model changes.
This is actually not possible. There is a set of laws called the "Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act" or HIPAA. This prohibits us and anyone else to misuse your data and share them without your consent.
> Many people don’t realize that the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) actually enables information sharing. HIPAA (specifically the HIPAA Privacy Rule) defines the circumstances in which a Covered Entity (CE) may use or disclose an individual’s Protected Health Information (PHI). HIPAA provides many pathways for permissibly exchanging PHI, which are commonly referred to as HIPAA Permitted Uses and Disclosures.

https://www.healthit.gov/topic/interoperability/how-hipaa-su...

You are absolutely right. What it comes down to, however, is consent by the individual. Data will not be shared without your permission. We will make sure our legal language is clearer here.
I think what people are getting at is that the legal language can be changed after an acquisition and our previously-safe data is now owned by a less scrupulous entity.
But what data? All of it or some subset? Aggregated, differentially privatised, non-identifiable chunks?

Without specific explanations, you could always weasel out of vague promises.

Sorry to sound negative. I'd love a service like this, but there's a very high bar for responsible implementation (in my opinion) and VC seems very unlikely to be compatible with responsibility.

Basically, what is your business model? Are you only making money from subscriptions, or through other means? What are the VC's expectations?

You went from "this is not possible" to "will not be shared without your permission" in one reply sequence. This whole thread is covered with people noting your website's doublespeak.

I think you need to stop for a bit and think about what ethical behavior is.

Thanks again for raising these points. They’re great feedback, especially in that we want to build a privacy-first company. As our next step, we’ll be taking all of these points to our legal team to update our privacy policy, and we’ll have a data security officer join our team soon.
It's concerning that you either don't understand HIPAA at all, or you're using it as a smoke screen to not actually address the concerns raised. Neither option is great here...
Pricing is too steep to pull the trigger on something so novel and whose utility, quality, and accuracy won't be obvious (or not) until a few tests are done. I'm not sure how to solve this other than to lower them for early adopters while you establish your brand and reputation.
This is the only pricing model we can offer at the moment. We're actively working on reducing our costs to be able to offer the tests at a more affordable price in the future.
Why am I not able to just give you $250 for a single test that has all the Premium data attached to it? If I see the information is useful, up sell me to multiple tests per year after that.

Right now you want me to pay $1308 (!!!) just to see if your "action plans" are any good. Since literally every other personalized health action plan I have ever seen has been useless, I am not inclined to dump $1308 to find out if you are telling the truth or not.

I would maybe be willing to pay $250 for a single premium result, but I am not going to risk paying $1.3k and end up disappointed.

Couple of questions:

- Do you have an example of what a report looks like?

- What's your turnaround time?

- Do you have an option to do one test if we're unsure we want to commit to a year?

- Can we do anonymized user information from the start, ie not providing name, address, etc (given recent supreme court decisions, it's not off the table that one day insurance companies would be allowed to access this data)

EDIT: here is a link to single-kit orders: https://bit.ly/iollo-single-kit

To answer your questions:

- Thanks for the suggestion, we're currently working on the example reports with our pilot users and will publish some of them soon.

- Our turnaround time is currently 2-3 weeks, but we're working to significantly reduce that.

- Given this feedback we're receiving, we'll implement that option shortly. For now if you want to try it, you can get the one test plan and I'll cancel the subscription for you.

- This is a good question, and we have to look into this. Data privacy is a big topic for many people. We have to mail the package somewhere, but maybe there are options.

On the last point, I don't think that is a huge problem. If you are doing one-off tests, then you could just automatically send them as "gift wrapped" which leaves it open to interpretation whether they used it or someone else used it (as long as you don't store PII)
Pity this is US only; Any idea when/if it will be available in Europe? I'm in Germany.
We have to get it to work here in the US first, but if you join the waitlist and tell which country you're in, then it'll help us know where to go next!

Also, Jan and I are from Germany, and Brent lives in Switzerland. Those countries will definitely be on the top of our list!

Do you have concerns about over-diagnosis, turning people in patients unnecessarily? Can this information creating outsized worry and psychological impacts that exceed the potential problem that may or may not eventuate? In the US I imagine there are also insurance implications.
Yes, we are taking this topic very seriously, especially in the light of recent genetic testing controversies. We will work hard on not only making the science behind our reports solid, but also making sure that the reports are communicated clearly. Early generations of the technology will mostly focus on overall health status and fitness. As for disease diagnosis, every single case will be worked out individually, will be tested, and will also be subject to regulatory scrutiny.
Some of the (?indicative) screengrabs on your website also seem to suggest that your app will advise a 'dietary source' when some level is low - is this actually your intention?

Because it's far from obvious that dietary supplementation of X is going to have a causal link to a reduction in problem Y, where Y is associated with low levels of X.

For example, a low ferritin isn't always best treated with iron supplements - certainly they won't treat the bowel cancer that could be the underlying cause.

I have a question based on what you said here:

> one of our participants had a high level of phthalic acid, which can be found in plastics and cosmetics and is a chemical known to disrupt hormones in the body

Does this mean that if elevated levels of some weird metabolite are found in my blood, you'll let me know? You say you measure 600 of them - does that mean you check for weird/high levels of all 600, and if you find some, they'll be in the report?

Is "Iollo" pronounced like "YOLO"?
(^◡^)
That's very clever honestly. All those 1's and 0's in there makes the wordmark looks "very computers," but it's also a meme, and it's also about longevity. A lot packed in there.
A lot thought went into picking this name, glad you noticed :)
Wasn't the whole point of YOLO to be something you "ironically" shout while doing something that might very well get you dead?
Do you have published research demonstrating that the sample collection process (and the 80uL specifically) is sufficiently precise to detect and quantify these metabolites into clinically meaningful ranges? This was the core problem with Theranos IIRC. I've quickly reviewed your sources below and they seem to be related to the clinical value of metabolites, I haven't seen one describing precision of the device itself.

I see you mention Theranos, but to be honest, this won't be the last time you get asked these questions. Every partner, news interview, and many potential customers will bring it up. So much so, that I would create a page specifically addressing these issues (in more detail than the FAQ).

Yes, mass-spectrometry-based metabolomics can be performed on as little as 20ul in certain cases, and 80ul is certainly enough. Below are a few studies from other authors and platforms, and there are many more out there.

https://arthritis-research.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.118... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8340475/

Specifications by an academic metabolomics facilty: https://www.embl.org/groups/metabolomics/faq/

Regarding your Theranos comment: You are absolutely right. This is something we will have to deal with, and where are actively working on our messaging.

Does one do a benchmark by running the same tests, at different volumes with the same blood across multiple testing machines/methods, and then compare the results for accuracy/variance?
Yes, exactly. We are running internal validation tests to (a) compare the quality of the measurements with larger amounts of blood collected the "regular" way, and (b) validate that the storage and transportation at room temperature does not have detrimental effects on the measurements.
The blood test accuracy problem that Theranos ran into wasn't so much about the specimen volume, but rather that they drew the blood from capillaries too close to the skin and thus it wasn't representative of blood circulating in larger veins. For some tests where they were just looking for any presence of certain substances that was good enough, but it couldn't work reliably for any test that needs consistent, quantitative results.
Do you think the subscription value proposition in your lower tier offers compelling value to consumers? What research have you done to make ensure your pricing tiers are market-appropriate?
How stabile is your "biological age" stat? Is this more like blood glucose (can change dramatically in minutes) or A1C (takes weeks to move significantly) or is it even more stable than that? Said another way: In the extreme case where you had a subject that was chrono_age = 60yrs and bio_age = 70yrs and they were perfectly compliant to your recommended interventions, how fast could you get the bio_age measure down to 50yrs?
The biological age takes months to move. After a certain number of tests, we'll be able to model how your bio_age responds to the recommendations and consequently make them better and better for you.
The HNLAUNCH promo code is showing as invalid for me.
How comfortable do you feel making these kinds of recommendations?

I feel like during my lifetime overall nutritional guidance has swung on plenty of things. One example would be eggs - "those are good for you, no wait they're bad and drive up your cholesterol, no wait, the cholesterol in eggs doesn't seem to raise cholesterol in humans who consume eggs".

I can see where you'd feel you have an edge by measuring each individual's blood over time and you can see how test results change after making changes in diet or behavior - except maybe you aren't factoring in so many other changes. Maybe I moved somewhere colder and I'm getting less sunlight. Maybe I got COVID. Maybe I took up swimming. Ok, so now a blood test is showing that I'm at a slightly higher risk for a disease - do I follow Iollo's dietary guidance? Do I try to get more Vitamin D? Do I just write it off as noise?

> I feel like during my lifetime overall nutritional guidance has swung on plenty of things. One example would be eggs - "those are good for you, no wait they're bad and drive up your cholesterol, no wait, the cholesterol in eggs doesn't seem to raise cholesterol in humans who consume eggs".

I feel like the major trend is acknowledging that there aren't many singular things which are bad enough for you to materially move the needle. Health (especially as you age) has a lot luck involved.

Sure, you're not going to fare very well if you're constantly stressed, never exercise, eat terribly, do a ton of drugs, and have an awful sleep schedule.

But whether or not you put kale or romaine in your green smoothie is not going to move the needle in a way that matters. Just like whether or not you have some eggs for breakfast most days or not is not going to materially move the needle.

It seemed like the "health craze" really started somewhere around the early 90s, when people started thinking about all these different vitamins they should be taking and foods they should be eating. I'm guessing this is just when people really started to market and push these products. It probably took 30 years to undo that and convince people they can settle down and there's way more important health decisions one can make than whether or not you eat eggs.

> It seemed like the "health craze" really started somewhere around the early 90s

In the 1700's people were literally blowing smoke up their asses. In the 1800's the Kellogg brothers invented the consumer packaged health-foods market. There's nothing new about health crazes. Maybe the 90's is when you entered the demo of "possible health craze customer" and you started see it?

In Annie Hall(?) a character mentions "Everything our parents told us was good for us, is bad for us. Sunshine, red meat, college, everything they said was good for us is bad for us!"
Regarding your first question on recommendations, and potential changes in established interventions (the egg example). In the earlier phases, we will mostly focus on established interventions that affect the metabolome and health and that have already been published by others, such as the DASH diet and exercise regimes. As you build your metabolomic trends over time, we'll then transition into more of our proprietary interventions.

Regarding your discussion of potential confounding factors due to changes in lifestyle parameters (swimming, sunlight etc.). That's an excellent question and important topic. For some metabolites, this does not matter. For example, if your glucose or Hba1c levels go above a certain value, you have diabetes, and it doesn't matter how it got there. For other metabolites, there might indeed be some external factors that influence the results. As you said, maybe you move somewhere cold, your metabolite levels suddenly switch, and the report says "warning". We have two answers for this: (1) For a lot of metabolites, these types of environmental factors and whether or not they play a role have been investigated in research studies and we thus know them. (2) Prior to each test, we will ask for as many lifestyle parameters as possible so we know that a certain change occurred and we can account for those in our analyses. Also over time, as we build our database, we will be able to automatically detect these changes for you and account for them (similar to Apple Watch's movement detector).

This sounds like the pitch I got from a friend who drank the Theranos kool-aid.
Theranos contained the seed of a good idea. That it was a toxic cult run by psychopaths is unfortunate.