Viome – C+ [1.5]

See this post for the criteria being used.

Accessibility: DNo Downloads
Significance: DNo Values or averages
Reference:  BExcellent volume, lack of linkage
Actions: BSimilar list to Thryve-Inside.
Evidence: DNone could be located
Benevolence: B
Support:  A No issues reported
Promptness: CSee data below
Metadata: B-Provides simple 3 state ratings, no actual values
Overtime: CCharts provided for metadata
Taxa Score: 100?% – AOn a sample, only 123 reported
Taxa Scope 100?% Only a few reported on

Gives Evaluation of different Aspects

For each one, a simple 3 state chart is shown (without values or references)

Pointer is always in the middle of a bar.
With multiple samples, you see the change over time (in terms of the 3 states, not actual values)
There are ranges (indirectly) – for example, you may be in 75% of the population!

Reports which Bacteria but not amount!

I did a count of the number reported (includes virii etc) and the total count of species/strains was {279, 296, 376, 246}. uBiome averge count of species was 82, so equivalent or better for species identified.

Most taxa have general boiler-plating such as show above.

Processing Time

Actual time vary greatly, but 3 weeks seems the norm.


A possible vendor is suggested, but different vendors are shown at different spots


They provide a long list of 565 citations here. Unfortunately it is unclear of how the references connect to their conclusions.

Bottom Line

For a user that wants just diet changes suggestions without visibility into the logic or needing to understand the microbiome, Viome does a fine job. For any individual that wanting to take ownership of the changes, it is a disaster — no downloads, no reference numbers, no counts, no ability to simply trace from suggestions back to literature for specific items.

If Viome opens up their data, they will likely be an awesome provider.