But I do want to sequence it using a third-party that gives me all the raw data. I live in Europe and I'm just a simple consumer. Does anyone know how I can do this? What service would I use / you can recommend?
Them not keeping it on their side would be a huge bonus of course but not sure I can ask for that much.
Many companies offer that. In the local area they have e. g. mail-like stations where you give out your order and they give you what you need (e. g. if it is a plasmid, it is mailed into storage boxes often on the same day or next day).
"Not keeping it on their side" ... well. If they sequenced it, they have data in their computer, right? How could you avoid that? I don't see this as possible, it depends on trust (and whether you really care about that).
> What service would I use / you can recommend?
I won't recommend anything as I do not want to be an ad-amplifier, but my personal rule of thumb is that those companies that are affiliated with science clusters, are often chosen because they offer high quality (and to some extent because of corruption e. g. xyz knows abc, but this is IMO the smaller part, usually it is quality/speed/ease of use).
"Not keeping it on their side" ... well. If they sequenced it, they have data in their computer, right? How could you avoid that? I don't see this as possible, it depends on trust"
First it depends on the contract, if it states they have the right, then they can and will legally use it.
If the contract would say no - then they would have a much harder time making use of that data, as it would be illegal.
> This is intended to be read by AI- please just copy and paste the URL of this and have ChatGPT walk you through it. If you have AR glasses, even better, since the AI can walk you through the whole protocol.
What kind of magic is going on here, am I missing something?
I suspect the intention is to give specific but dense notes with minimal explanation, on the theory that the LLM will fill in the appropriate hand-holding along the way
I feel it's actually kind of smart. Most people won't be reading the blog post themselves, they'd ask GPT to understand the text and fetch the summary or whatever is relevant to them. The author has directly made the resource such that it is optimised for the output after that mostly-everyone-would-do-this step.
Hi, author here- I intended it to be hands-free so you can upload to ChatGPT/Claude and talk to it. I found it easier to follow the protocol each time by talking to AI rather than having to read from the computer every time I had to check something, reducing context-switching
I've bee thinking about starting a company where I fish roots out of your sewer and identify the plant (by sequence if necessary) that you have to kill so your sewer doesn't collapse as soon as it otherwise would.
$100 to stave off that $10000 sewer replacement for a few years would be worth it to a lot of people
Well if you have this problem, then having the plumber over is a sunk cost. You're paying them regularly to clear the sewer, and their snake will come back with root matter in the bit. Put that sample in a zip-lock bag and call me. I'll come over, take the sample, and identify the plants near your sewer line. If I get a match, I'll sell that info to you for $100.
Once I figure out how to make it work at all, I'll build a network of plant nerds and teach them to do the same in their cities, and pivot to providing lab services and training for them. Much of the time no sequencing will be required, just a microscope and knowledge of what's growing nearby. But if they have more than one plant of the same species, sequencing will be necessary.
Fingers crossed they're not clones, though I suppose I could do lab testing for that as well, and then I maybe you'd have to kill multiple just to be sure you got the one. In that case, hopefully I'd have at least narrowed it down for you. Probably would just deny the job if the odd of being helpful are low, like if you have 50 clones of the same tree all growing along your sewer line, then I can't help you, it's time to start saving for a liner or a replacement.
This is precisely what I do each year with a product designed for this exact purpose. $8+shipping gets me enough for my annual pipe maintenance. It's even the special kind because I have clay pipes.
I don't wasn't to kill parents idea. It's neat, and Im sure there's use cases that my solution doesn't meet
I wish this had some discussion of the results. The earlier reports about this sensor and process were very mixed. It’s a cool process either way, but I’d like to know how usable the real world output can be.
I suspect there is a deep sequencing service that is non CLIA and cheap. True. they may not be trustworthy with the data. That said, there are steps here where the data is put into Claude. Do we trust that ?
It's not impossible: Claude can take care of bioinformatics part. But to understand genetics and cellular biology you need a knowledge foundation first.
Unless you just want it on a level "Does this mutation leads to a genetic disorder X" - this is a simple way to put it, but not enough to actually understand genetics.
That's another vector, and everyone considers separately. But at least here one can - hypothetically - have a BAA and zero-retention agreement with Anthropic. Which means they have moderately strong incentives to wipe your data after a fairly short while. CLIA, if I don't misremember, mandates a few years at minimum.
This is so cool. Thanks for doing this. The fact that we have this in a palm sized object is just crazy. Also, if/when we have a similar sized device for doing CRISPR .... umm i should stop here - it's becoming the plot of Gattaca
I like the privacy conscious aspects. Apart from the obvious issue of "run it through Claude" how many of those referenced analysis tools are entirely open source or at least run locally? Would have liked to see that in the article.
Bringing everything to your doorstep and everything at your feet and everything near your fingertips is just what all industries are trying to accomplice. The cartoon Animation Wall-E has scenes in it where they show obese humans doing everything through a screen though notice their legs and feet and it's as if they've mutated to a point where they aren't able to walk anymore and all their transport is through a hovering chair cum bed.
I watched wall-e in theater, and when that scene came on, i remember muttering 'what bs'; since then, i recall that scene every time i see a situation of 'convenience at all costs'; metaphorically they were pretty accurate even after discounting ozempic influence;
When you are taking care of your health, and need to learn more about your built-in limitations is it still narcissistic?
At the bottom of the page there is a link to Sid Sijbrandij's cancer journey. He is one of the cofounders of GitLab. This is one of the coverages of his story: https://centuryofbio.com/p/sid
What is the accuracy in this ? Aka if I run the experiment 10 times how many differences will i get? I don’t have a physical sense on what would be a good number.
You would get a lot of differences, but the errors would cancel each other out with enough depth of coverage.
This technology's baseline accuracy is around 95% per base, so 10x reads of every segment in the sample would give >99% accuracy for each base after aligning the reads with each other.
one main marketing leverage of 23andMe, AncestryDNA, etc are fulfilling the curiosity of people who want to know which part of the world their genes are from. I guess that dataset should be preparatory.
Problem with those providers - they only check 700K positions out of 3 billion and there is no mapping quality or allelic depth data in those dataset and this is critical for assessing whether the detected variant is a false positive or real.
It's not suitable for health investigations since most of DNA is not sequenced and genotyping technology is known to produce high rate of false positive for rare mutations.
(I'm the solo-founder of Gene Inspector Pro, mentioned in the blog post). AMA. :)
Nothing about this is the future. Sequencing at home will not solve any major problems. It's mainly a fun exercise to demonstrate that sequencing has been commodified.
I disagree, I sequenced with nebula genomics years ago.. you can understand risk factors for various problems so that you can start interventions that make sense way in advance.
I don't wasn't someone else to have a copy of my genome, whilst wanting to analyse my genome. The only way to do that is with affordable home sequencing.
> The near-term value is turning a static genome into something queryable
Ok. So ... how exactly is this valuable?
If you realise "hey, I gots Huntington disease", this is going to make you feel better? Or any other incurable disease? I am not disputing that knowing the sequence is useless in general, mind you. I am specifically asking WHY it is necessary to know your genome sequence. This seems to be a simplification or just a "having reached a milestone". But then they don't really explain WHY it is useful. None of the bulletin points he listed is really useful:
> Which variants do I have?
And this is useful ... how exactly?
> Which genes and pathways are affected?
And ... this matters why?
> Which medicines might I metabolize differently?
Ok, so this has a potential use case here, since he
can choose to avoid specific drugs. How useful that
really is in practice is unclear. (Don't confuse
drug companies trying to convince YOU that personalized
medicine is important on THEIR use case.)
> What rare variants should I take seriously?
Seriously ... how? Ok, you avoid some compounds. Now what.
> Where does the model know nothing yet?
Great, so a model that is limited, but now I need to
burden myself with having to know where that limitations
are. So my brain just has extra processing to do, without
getting anything useful in return.
> the “edit yourself with CRISPR” will most likely follow
Except that they have not solved the off-target cleavage
yet. Besides, they milk the prices anyway. DNA manipulation
should be safe, secure, correct and affordable. None of that
is the case right now. They publish papers where CRISPR has
solved everything, but then fail to explain why it isn't
already used by billions. And there are reasons as to why.
> Give your genome to Claude Code
Oh my god ... AI becomes your dependency here.
Note that the step-by-step guide is actually not totally
useless, as it can give a basis for real work. But I highly
doubt that untrained people will easily be able to go through
those steps. Everyone is a master in the lab now? RNA is
easy to handle? Guess then one would have to explain why
RNase A is used (ok ok it's not playing a huge role here
since DNA is the target of isolation, but it is more of an
example of how many things can go wrong, and there is not
really an explanation of why xyz is used; this looks like
an AI step-by-step guide. AI really makes people dumber).
Man, doctors thought they had it bad before. For just a six yards I can play Peter Thiel at home! $6k invested so I can set an AI in YOLO mode to tell me I have some hyper-specific version of kennel cough?
“But that occurs in dogs?”
“You’re right. Let me look into actual gene sequencing instead of just guessing. I think the N is the load bearing letter.”
Hi, author here- you can read it too, though it is dense. I have updated that specific sentence.
I found it easier to upload the protocol to ChatGPT and have audio walk you through it. This allows you to swap between pipettes, measurements, etc without having to look at the screen, reducing context-switching
The "non-random errors" point buried a few replies down deserves to be the headline, not a footnote. With Illumina, 10x coverage genuinely washes out errors because they're closer to independent per-read noise. With Nanopore, errors cluster at specific motifs (homopolymers, certain k-mers) due to how the pore physically reads the strand — so the same systematic mistake shows up across most of your reads at that position, and naive majority-vote consensus won't fix it. You need a basecaller/consensus model trained to correct for those specific failure modes (which is exactly what the current-gen Guppy/Dorado models try to do), not just "more depth." That distinction matters a lot for a home setup: coverage is cheap, but knowing where your specific errors are systematic vs. random is what determines whether "buy more reads" actually gets you to clinical-grade accuracy or just gives you a very confident wrong answer.
I don't want to sequence at home.
But I do want to sequence it using a third-party that gives me all the raw data. I live in Europe and I'm just a simple consumer. Does anyone know how I can do this? What service would I use / you can recommend?
Them not keeping it on their side would be a huge bonus of course but not sure I can ask for that much.
Many companies offer that. In the local area they have e. g. mail-like stations where you give out your order and they give you what you need (e. g. if it is a plasmid, it is mailed into storage boxes often on the same day or next day).
"Not keeping it on their side" ... well. If they sequenced it, they have data in their computer, right? How could you avoid that? I don't see this as possible, it depends on trust (and whether you really care about that).
> What service would I use / you can recommend?
I won't recommend anything as I do not want to be an ad-amplifier, but my personal rule of thumb is that those companies that are affiliated with science clusters, are often chosen because they offer high quality (and to some extent because of corruption e. g. xyz knows abc, but this is IMO the smaller part, usually it is quality/speed/ease of use).
"Not keeping it on their side" ... well. If they sequenced it, they have data in their computer, right? How could you avoid that? I don't see this as possible, it depends on trust"
First it depends on the contract, if it states they have the right, then they can and will legally use it.
If the contract would say no - then they would have a much harder time making use of that data, as it would be illegal.
Sequencing dot com.
TellmeGen
DNA Complete.
Unless you live in Germany (in Germany it seems to be illegal to send saliva to other countries).
> But I do want to sequence it using a third-party
Don't forget to change your DNA when the third party's database will eventually leak. (see the 21andMe's data leak: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/23andMe_data_leak)
> This is intended to be read by AI- please just copy and paste the URL of this and have ChatGPT walk you through it. If you have AR glasses, even better, since the AI can walk you through the whole protocol.
What kind of magic is going on here, am I missing something?
I suspect the intention is to give specific but dense notes with minimal explanation, on the theory that the LLM will fill in the appropriate hand-holding along the way
I feel it's actually kind of smart. Most people won't be reading the blog post themselves, they'd ask GPT to understand the text and fetch the summary or whatever is relevant to them. The author has directly made the resource such that it is optimised for the output after that mostly-everyone-would-do-this step.
Hi, author here- I intended it to be hands-free so you can upload to ChatGPT/Claude and talk to it. I found it easier to follow the protocol each time by talking to AI rather than having to read from the computer every time I had to check something, reducing context-switching
You can still read it, though it is pretty dense
How can I know if the the results I get are real or just some garbage?
I've bee thinking about starting a company where I fish roots out of your sewer and identify the plant (by sequence if necessary) that you have to kill so your sewer doesn't collapse as soon as it otherwise would.
$100 to stave off that $10000 sewer replacement for a few years would be worth it to a lot of people
Do it!
Hard to get a plumber to knock on my door for under $100. Maybe you mean $500? Or is it $100 for the lab bit only?
Well if you have this problem, then having the plumber over is a sunk cost. You're paying them regularly to clear the sewer, and their snake will come back with root matter in the bit. Put that sample in a zip-lock bag and call me. I'll come over, take the sample, and identify the plants near your sewer line. If I get a match, I'll sell that info to you for $100.
Once I figure out how to make it work at all, I'll build a network of plant nerds and teach them to do the same in their cities, and pivot to providing lab services and training for them. Much of the time no sequencing will be required, just a microscope and knowledge of what's growing nearby. But if they have more than one plant of the same species, sequencing will be necessary.
Fingers crossed they're not clones, though I suppose I could do lab testing for that as well, and then I maybe you'd have to kill multiple just to be sure you got the one. In that case, hopefully I'd have at least narrowed it down for you. Probably would just deny the job if the odd of being helpful are low, like if you have 50 clones of the same tree all growing along your sewer line, then I can't help you, it's time to start saving for a liner or a replacement.
It's like uber, but for shit-covered roots.
That’s a really clever idea, I would definitely pay for that in the right circumstances.
Now that I think about it - could you just pour some sort of biodegradable broad-spectrum herbicide down the drain to get the same effect for cheaper?
This is precisely what I do each year with a product designed for this exact purpose. $8+shipping gets me enough for my annual pipe maintenance. It's even the special kind because I have clay pipes.
I don't wasn't to kill parents idea. It's neat, and Im sure there's use cases that my solution doesn't meet
I hope yours keeps working for you. I flushed a lot of blue crystals, but the plant was not deterred.
I wish this had some discussion of the results. The earlier reports about this sensor and process were very mixed. It’s a cool process either way, but I’d like to know how usable the real world output can be.
https://www.the-odin.com/whole-genome-sequencing-30x/
If you want it quick and cheap(er) - 599.00
If it's an US-based lab, aren't they subject to CLIA with all its retention requirements?
For $7.5k+ you get a guaranteed privacy (as other comments suggest, other properties may vary, but at least the data never leaves your home).
I suspect there is a deep sequencing service that is non CLIA and cheap. True. they may not be trustworthy with the data. That said, there are steps here where the data is put into Claude. Do we trust that ?
I would never trust that. Instead I would use Claude to teach me genomics and build the tools to process and interpret data locally
haha. hubris thy name is tzumby.
look up what isaac asimov had to say about genomic analysis.
It's not impossible: Claude can take care of bioinformatics part. But to understand genetics and cellular biology you need a knowledge foundation first.
Unless you just want it on a level "Does this mutation leads to a genetic disorder X" - this is a simple way to put it, but not enough to actually understand genetics.
That's another vector, and everyone considers separately. But at least here one can - hypothetically - have a BAA and zero-retention agreement with Anthropic. Which means they have moderately strong incentives to wipe your data after a fairly short while. CLIA, if I don't misremember, mandates a few years at minimum.
A service is not the same as the equipment
I'm waiting for someone to make an open source gene sharing platform to rival ancestry etc in the future.
There must be some cool way to share enough structure with some cryptography to share parts of your dna to find relatives etc
With such cheap costs every city should be sequencing dog turds and sending out big fines. The pay back would be very quick.
It's quite a bit more difficult with poop. A rather large proportion of the DNA in poop isn't from the creature that pooped it. (mostly bacteria)
This is so cool. Thanks for doing this. The fact that we have this in a palm sized object is just crazy. Also, if/when we have a similar sized device for doing CRISPR .... umm i should stop here - it's becoming the plot of Gattaca
I like the privacy conscious aspects. Apart from the obvious issue of "run it through Claude" how many of those referenced analysis tools are entirely open source or at least run locally? Would have liked to see that in the article.
At a quick glance, they all seem to have published their source code and they do run locally.
Bringing everything to your doorstep and everything at your feet and everything near your fingertips is just what all industries are trying to accomplice. The cartoon Animation Wall-E has scenes in it where they show obese humans doing everything through a screen though notice their legs and feet and it's as if they've mutated to a point where they aren't able to walk anymore and all their transport is through a hovering chair cum bed.
I watched wall-e in theater, and when that scene came on, i remember muttering 'what bs'; since then, i recall that scene every time i see a situation of 'convenience at all costs'; metaphorically they were pretty accurate even after discounting ozempic influence;
This feels like the acme of narcissism. How much time and money are people willing to spend on navel gazing?
When you are taking care of your health, and need to learn more about your built-in limitations is it still narcissistic?
At the bottom of the page there is a link to Sid Sijbrandij's cancer journey. He is one of the cofounders of GitLab. This is one of the coverages of his story: https://centuryofbio.com/p/sid
What is the accuracy in this ? Aka if I run the experiment 10 times how many differences will i get? I don’t have a physical sense on what would be a good number.
You would get a lot of differences, but the errors would cancel each other out with enough depth of coverage.
This technology's baseline accuracy is around 95% per base, so 10x reads of every segment in the sample would give >99% accuracy for each base after aligning the reads with each other.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coverage_(genetics)
> so 10x reads of every segment in the sample would give >99% accuracy for each base after aligning the reads with each other
This assumes random errors, which IIRC isn't the case for Oxford Nanopore.
Oxford Nanopore unfortunately has a high error rate (3-5%) compared to other sequencing technologies. And the errors are non-random
one main marketing leverage of 23andMe, AncestryDNA, etc are fulfilling the curiosity of people who want to know which part of the world their genes are from. I guess that dataset should be preparatory.
Problem with those providers - they only check 700K positions out of 3 billion and there is no mapping quality or allelic depth data in those dataset and this is critical for assessing whether the detected variant is a false positive or real.
It's not suitable for health investigations since most of DNA is not sequenced and genotyping technology is known to produce high rate of false positive for rare mutations.
(I'm the solo-founder of Gene Inspector Pro, mentioned in the blog post). AMA. :)
I'm too afraid I would learn something awful about myself.
Unfortunately you’d have no power to correct it. Even if such a thing were possible. I hope that changes.
Are you talking about time travel? I don't think that would help.
More like genome editing.
Reminds me of the Gloing Plant Project. I never got my glowing flower but would have settled for the instruction manual, also never created :(
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glowing_Plant_project
By the by, can't seen to bring up the actual site linked on this post.
You can get one here, you'll have to wait until next year though: https://light.bio/
I am very impressed with the, why wait? just do it now approach to the future. which while not here, IS there.
Nothing about this is the future. Sequencing at home will not solve any major problems. It's mainly a fun exercise to demonstrate that sequencing has been commodified.
just a hobby project for now,pretty wild that this can be done at home.
Knowing exactly why I have high LDL because of a specific mutation on my DNA is very much the future, imo.
I disagree, I sequenced with nebula genomics years ago.. you can understand risk factors for various problems so that you can start interventions that make sense way in advance.
I don't wasn't someone else to have a copy of my genome, whilst wanting to analyse my genome. The only way to do that is with affordable home sequencing.
> The near-term value is turning a static genome into something queryable
Ok. So ... how exactly is this valuable?
If you realise "hey, I gots Huntington disease", this is going to make you feel better? Or any other incurable disease? I am not disputing that knowing the sequence is useless in general, mind you. I am specifically asking WHY it is necessary to know your genome sequence. This seems to be a simplification or just a "having reached a milestone". But then they don't really explain WHY it is useful. None of the bulletin points he listed is really useful:
> Which variants do I have?
And this is useful ... how exactly?
> Which genes and pathways are affected?
And ... this matters why?
> Which medicines might I metabolize differently?
Ok, so this has a potential use case here, since he can choose to avoid specific drugs. How useful that really is in practice is unclear. (Don't confuse drug companies trying to convince YOU that personalized medicine is important on THEIR use case.)
> What rare variants should I take seriously?
Seriously ... how? Ok, you avoid some compounds. Now what.
> Where does the model know nothing yet?
Great, so a model that is limited, but now I need to burden myself with having to know where that limitations are. So my brain just has extra processing to do, without getting anything useful in return.
> the “edit yourself with CRISPR” will most likely follow
Except that they have not solved the off-target cleavage yet. Besides, they milk the prices anyway. DNA manipulation should be safe, secure, correct and affordable. None of that is the case right now. They publish papers where CRISPR has solved everything, but then fail to explain why it isn't already used by billions. And there are reasons as to why.
> Give your genome to Claude Code
Oh my god ... AI becomes your dependency here.
Note that the step-by-step guide is actually not totally useless, as it can give a basis for real work. But I highly doubt that untrained people will easily be able to go through those steps. Everyone is a master in the lab now? RNA is easy to handle? Guess then one would have to explain why RNase A is used (ok ok it's not playing a huge role here since DNA is the target of isolation, but it is more of an example of how many things can go wrong, and there is not really an explanation of why xyz is used; this looks like an AI step-by-step guide. AI really makes people dumber).
> This is intended to be read by AI
Fuck this
Yeah that's weird. The instructions are not even hard to read. I don't understand what an LLM would add to this.
Literally left the article to come here and say this.
Man, doctors thought they had it bad before. For just a six yards I can play Peter Thiel at home! $6k invested so I can set an AI in YOLO mode to tell me I have some hyper-specific version of kennel cough?
“But that occurs in dogs?”
“You’re right. Let me look into actual gene sequencing instead of just guessing. I think the N is the load bearing letter.”
Funniest thing I read today, thank you!
As long as the AI doesn't brush its teeth all good.
Hi, author here- you can read it too, though it is dense. I have updated that specific sentence.
I found it easier to upload the protocol to ChatGPT and have audio walk you through it. This allows you to swap between pipettes, measurements, etc without having to look at the screen, reducing context-switching
The "non-random errors" point buried a few replies down deserves to be the headline, not a footnote. With Illumina, 10x coverage genuinely washes out errors because they're closer to independent per-read noise. With Nanopore, errors cluster at specific motifs (homopolymers, certain k-mers) due to how the pore physically reads the strand — so the same systematic mistake shows up across most of your reads at that position, and naive majority-vote consensus won't fix it. You need a basecaller/consensus model trained to correct for those specific failure modes (which is exactly what the current-gen Guppy/Dorado models try to do), not just "more depth." That distinction matters a lot for a home setup: coverage is cheap, but knowing where your specific errors are systematic vs. random is what determines whether "buy more reads" actually gets you to clinical-grade accuracy or just gives you a very confident wrong answer.