Function HealthReviews of functionhealth.com

No waiting, affordable, kind technician who knew what she was doing. Took my blood with no bad effects! The results that we got were very helpful. Looking forward to going over them with my doctor! It makes so much sense. I hope that all of medicine will start going in this direction.

Is Function Health A Scam Company? No Function Health is not a scam company but... Function’s blood testing is convenient, thorough and well-priced. Overall, I still think it is a better offering than Bryan Johnson’s Immortals. But in my opinion, its marketing is misleading about what you get beyond the tests. “Doctor-reviewed insights” and a “personalized protocol for instant action” led me to expect meaningful, individualized guidance. What I received as “Clinician Notes” read to me like AI slop presented with the authority of a clinician’s work. The notes fixated on certain information, made assumptions from broad questionnaire responses, repeated themselves, contained internal contradictions and drew conclusions more confidently than the evidence presented appeared to justify. Possible associations became personalized explanations, despite Function later telling me it cannot provide medical opinions and referring me elsewhere for interpretation. I sent a detailed complaint asking about the interpretations, AI involvement, clinical review and privacy. The first response came from an explicitly labeled AI agent, so I asked for a human. The human response was also unsatisfactory: AI “assists” clinicians, and licensed clinicians review the notes. They identified my reviewer but did not provide his credentials or explain what he specifically checked, wrote, changed or approved. I followed up with six specific questions: 1. Did AI generate or draft my notes and their substantive interpretations? 2. What specifically did the clinician do before approving them? 3. Will a different clinician reassess the interpretations I challenged? 4. What is the clinical basis for those disputed conclusions? 5. How do individualized “Clinician Notes” square with saying Function provides no medical opinions? 6. Was my identifiable health information shared with an external AI provider, and if so, which provider, what data, and what retention practices and safeguards applied? I was asking them to explain the report they had already delivered, not diagnose me or create a treatment plan. I received another generic response thanking me for my “feedback” and promising to forward it. Then I waited over a week. Only after I warned that I would share my experience publicly did I get another response, within an hour. They said a clinician conducts a full review of results and supplied history. They also stated that no external AI large language model processed my information to prepare the notes and that they do not use my identifiable health information to train AI models. Those were useful clarifications, but they still did not explain whether AI drafted the substantive interpretations, what my reviewer specifically did, or the reasoning behind the statements I challenged. They did not confirm a reassessment by another clinician. Instead, they said: “Function does not provide a separate clinical opinion or a statement-by-statement clinical rationale beyond the Clinician Notes.” They clarified that their earlier disclaimer about medical opinions referred to an additional assessment. That still left me unable to get explanations or corrections for work they had already delivered. My opinion is that Function uses AI to generate interpretations and packages them to appear to be individualized work from a clinician. Function acknowledges AI involvement and insists the notes receive full clinical review, but this experience has not given me confidence in that review. As of this review, my specific concerns remain substantively unanswered, with no corrections or confirmed independent reassessment. The blood tests have value. But the interpretation, transparency and customer service fell well short of what the marketing led me to expect. “Clinician-reviewed” should mean more than an assurance repeated whenever someone questions what the clinician approved.

They have cancelled my blood draw twice now late evening before the appointment the following morning.

Perfect for my needs. Physician notes were helpful, and love that it is based on optimal, not just accepted average ranges based on an overall unhealthy population.

Very easy to use. Fast and comprehensive results.

There should be a list of tests still pending after doing a session. I should be able to export a previous set of results not just the most recent since the point of this is to track and improve over time and be able to share past results. This experience will make me reconsider continuing.

I highly recommend Function Health and am happily renewing this year. Even though my insurance covers standard lab work ordered by my internist, Function’s basic annual panel goes vastly deeper than typical healthcare baselines. The AI-driven blood panel breakdowns are amazingly thorough, and as an early Oura ring adopter, I love being able to sync my wearable data into one central dashboard. My only critique is the "biological age" metric. While I was thrilled to test 18 years younger, the algorithm doesn't heavily factor in lipids. Knowing I have sky-high cholesterol, that score clearly doesn't reflect my actual cardiovascular reality. Take the biological age with a grain of salt, but for proactive health tracking and unparalleled data depth, this service is absolutely worth it.

I love all the tests that you run. They are so informative. The results give very in depth notes on what each test means. Everyone should do it.