Abstract Clinical chemistry is going through an identity crisis, squeezed between automation (de-skilling) on the service side and molecular genetics in research. Automated routine estimations are now carried out and interpreted by machines; the skilled staff members required are more likely to have degrees in electronics than medicine or biochemistry. The role of molecular genetics is more ambiguous; it is inherently reductionist, in that it attempts to explain most clinical phenomena in terms of DNA sequence alone. This has been remarkably successful for single-gene defects (such as those causing Duchenne muscular dystrophy, hemoglobinopathies, cystic fibrosis, and ataxias) and may well prove equally so for Alzheimer's disease, cancer, heart disease, and schizophrenia. DNA diagnosis is not yet routine, but because of technical advances such as gene amplification ("PCR") and high-sensitivity gene-detection assays, it may soon become so, not only in major centers but also in local pathology laboratories and general practice. Clinical chemists must decide whether they wish to respond to this new and stimulating challenge by retooling and retraining. Should anyone be p
📖 افتح في inklap 🔗 DOI 📮 اطلب بحثاً