# Redefining disease in the age of blood-based biomarkers

## TL;DR

This paper examines how new blood-based biomarkers are changing how diseases are defined, raising ethical and societal concerns.

## Contribution

It introduces a sociological critique of diagnostic expansion driven by corporate interests in the age of blood-based biomarkers.

## Key findings

- Blood-based biomarkers are expanding diagnostic criteria for diseases like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's.
- Corporate and institutional influences are reshaping health and disease boundaries.
- Premature diagnoses and overtreatment are potential risks of these diagnostic expansions.

## Abstract

This article explores the sociological and ethical implications of redefining disease in the era of advanced diagnostic technologies, with a focus on blood-based biomarkers. Drawing from Foucault's concept of medicalization and Illich's critique of disease mongering, it highlights how diagnostic expansions, driven by corporate and institutional influences, are reshaping the boundaries of health and disease. Advances such as blood assays for Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases, liquid biopsies in oncology, and biomarkers for depression and diabetes, while promising, raise concerns about premature diagnoses and overtreatment. The influence of pharmaceutical and insurance industries on diagnostic criteria, as seen in the ICD updates, underscores the need to address conflicts of interest and regulatory gaps. Case studies on Alzheimer's and Parkinson's reveal how these changes could benefit stakeholders at the expense of patient welfare. The article calls for ethical oversight, stricter regulation, and research into the population-level efficacy of diagnostic and treatment protocols.