How does more genetic data equate to better progress with medicine? Are we testing medicine against specific genome sequences, now? If so, how are we doing that without the source host[s] to test against?
>Medical progress is not advancing fast enough by some very real metrics...
Again, I'm not seeing how these two equate, whatsoever.
For what you're talking about the genomes would have to be reproduced, such as the markers that are the precursors for breastcancer. Then, the tissues, themselves, would have to be reproduced and then you'd have an effective field with which to test new medicines against (unless you just use the people with the markers to test).
How you're getting from a mapped sequence to better medicine is... ...we're simply not there, yet, technologically, I believe. Unless you know something I don't? (Which could very well be the case, admittedly, but I doubt we're at the stage of computer models for genome engineering, tissue growth, cellular division, etc. all in one.)