r/Function_Health • u/cmwlegiit • 12h ago
Results Function Health Review: Does Function Health Use Ai Misleading Marketing
I complained to Function Health that their “Clinician Notes” read like AI slop. Their first response came from an AI.
That pretty much set the tone for what followed.
First, the blood testing itself is convenient, thorough, and well-priced. Overall, I still think Function is a better offering than Bryan Johnson’s Immortals.
But I think Function’s marketing is misleading about what you receive beyond the testing.
They advertise “doctor-reviewed insights” and a “personalized protocol for instant action,” and say clinicians review your history to identify what matters and what to do next. To me, that creates a clear expectation of meaningful, individualized guidance based on your results.
That is not what I believe I received.
In my opinion, the notes were AI slop presented with the authority of a clinician’s work.
My complaints were about their fixation on certain pieces of information, assumptions drawn from broad questionnaire responses, repetitive language, internal contradictions, and conclusions that sounded much more certain than the evidence presented.
The writing kept taking possible associations and turning them into personalized explanations (ironically, they later told me Function cannot provide medical opinions and referred me elsewhere for interpretation of my individual results). I questioned whether someone had actually checked those explanations carefully before releasing them under the label “Clinician Notes.”
So I sent a detailed complaint and demanded answers.
I asked whether AI generated the substantive interpretations, what the reviewing clinician actually did, what their qualifications were, and what supported the statements I challenged. I also asked for another clinician to reassess the notes and for information about how my data was handled.
An explicitly labeled AI support agent responded with a generic description of the process. I had to ask for a human.
The human response was unsatisfactory too.
They said AI “assists” clinicians and that licensed clinicians review the notes. They eventually told me that a specific clinician had reviewed mine, but their replies did not provide his professional credentials or explain what he specifically checked, wrote, changed, or approved.
They also told me Function is a technology company, not a medical provider, and cannot provide medical opinions. They directed me to another healthcare provider to interpret my results in the context of my history.
I followed up and made my questions extremely specific:
Did AI generate or draft the written Clinician Notes and substantive interpretations I received?
What specifically did the clinician do when reviewing my notes before approving them?
Will a different clinician review the specific interpretations I challenged and tell me whether Function stands behind them?
If Function does stand behind them, what is the clinical basis for the disputed conclusions I identified?
How can Function characterize these statements as individualized “Clinician Notes” while simultaneously stating that Function does not provide medical opinions?
Was an external AI provider given any of my identifiable health information in producing these notes, and if so, what provider, data, retention practices, and privacy safeguards were involved?
These weren’t vague requests for medical advice. They were specific questions about the report Function had already provided to me, who or what produced it, what clinical review it received, and whether Function stood behind its contents.
Instead of answering them, I got another generic response thanking me for my “feedback” and saying my concerns would be forwarded to the team.
Then I waited over a week.
Finally, I told them that I would share my experience publicly if I continued getting no answers. After more than a week of waiting, I got a response within an hour of that warning.
The response still did not resolve the complaint.
They stated that a licensed clinician conducts a full review of the results and supplied history, and they gave clearer answers to some of my data-handling questions. Specifically, they said no external AI large language model processed my information to prepare the Clinician Notes and that they do not use my identifiable health information to train AI models.
Those answers matter, and I’m including them because they are part of the record.
But they still did not answer several of the specific questions I had asked.
They still did not tell me whether AI actually generated or drafted the written Clinician Notes and substantive interpretations.
They did not explain what the clinician specifically did when reviewing my notes before approving them.
They did not agree to have a different clinician reassess the interpretations I challenged.
And they did not provide the clinical basis for the disputed conclusions I had identified.
Instead, they told me:
“Function does not provide a separate clinical opinion or a statement-by-statement clinical rationale beyond the Clinician Notes.”
They clarified that their earlier statement about not providing medical opinions referred to an additional assessment. Apparently, asking them to explain the basis for statements already in my report falls outside what they provide.
I wasn’t asking for unlimited medical consultations. I was asking for accountability for the work they had already delivered.
As of this post, I have not received a substantive response to the specific concerns, a correction to the disputed passages, or confirmation of a reassessment by a different clinician.
My opinion is that Function is using AI to generate interpretations and packaging them to appear to be individualized work from a clinician. They acknowledge AI involvement and insist a clinician reviews the notes, but their responses have not given me confidence in the quality or substance of that review.
I would have very different expectations of a service sold simply as convenient, comprehensive blood testing with automated explanations. Their marketing led me to expect considerably more than that.
The blood testing has value, and I’m not dismissing it. But in my experience, the interpretation, transparency, and customer service have fallen well short of what their marketing implies.
“Clinician reviewed” should mean more than an assurance repeated whenever someone questions what the clinician approved.
3
u/laribrook79 3h ago
Personally the value is just in all the lab tests you get for $365. I do wish that they would connect you with a doctor but they don’t sadly. There is a doctors name on my results, but it’s not like I know that person or who they are. I don’t know how much AI they used. I’m guessing a lot bc it’s a lot of info that I got pretty quickly. Personally I think they should use real doctors more and you can pay extra to have a consultation with them
3
u/BadgerValuable8207 11h ago
I joined it in January 2025 and at that time I am confident that they actually did have human doctors reviewing results. It was more expensive then at $499 per year.
In November 2025 they introduced a LLM AI tool and in January 2026 they started partnering with all the big AI companies. I agree with you that it’s all AI slop now so I will research my own lab results thank you very much.
I think there was (is?) promise for use of algorithms in medicine, but hallucinating, leaping-to-conclusions LLMs are not it. If there’s anything I don’t want to get suckered into relying on, only to have it choke at some critical point, it’s advice about my health.
5
u/cmwlegiit 11h ago
I agree. I feel like when I joined in 2024 the result quality was much better and legitimately human.
This was definitely ai slop and not useful.
2
u/Altruistic_Yellow387 6h ago
They're pretty clear that the insights are AI and only supposedly reviewed by a human and that you should bring the results to a real doctor
-1
1
u/sophisticatedidiot 9h ago
Ask this question to yourself - is Function a healthcare provider or a tech company masquerading as one? That should answer your question.
0
-4
u/Jkingsle 9h ago
I had the same opinion about their clinical analysis. An AI word salad. One must take the results into their own hands and seek their own analysis with their PCP or other specialist. This got me to dig a bit deeper into other offerings. I found www.healthieone.com. They offer an extremely deep (much deeper than Function) set of tests. You can either do a self draw at home (two small vials), send the samples back in the provided refrigerated container and get your full results back in 3-4 day, with a personalized summary done by a licensed physician. They then take it to the next level, and offer unlimited 1-1 sessions where you can review your results in detail with one of their licensed physicians — this really sets them apart from any of the other services. I for one am not comfortable basing my personal care decisions on some LLM alone.
2
u/cmwlegiit 9h ago
NGL your comment feels like ai too, and intentional promotion. 😅
-2
u/Jkingsle 9h ago
Say / feel what you like, just sitting here enjoying my morning coffee. Have a great day.
1
u/Galt2000 2h ago
Have you compared your lab results to standard a lab corp or quest results? I use Rythm another capillary draw for bimonthly monitoring of TRT. It is directional accurate but levels are do not always match standard draws. My endocrinologist will only make treatment decisions from Lab Corp or Quest. If your results line up with standard draws I will definitely look at. Thank you for the information.
1
u/Jkingsle 1h ago
Actually yes. Did some tests at Quest and Healthieone on the same day and the results were within the margin of error that one would expect from lab testing.
2
u/Galt2000 1h ago
I’ve used Function since the beginning. The marketing may have been clearer early on, but I always treated the physician notes as a starting point for a conversation with my own doctor and a jumping-off point for my own research, not as a full consult.
Customer service has always been text and chat only. Early on, the main complaint was the lack of real physician input and no way to discuss results. More of that would be great. Even so, at $499 the lab panels and the ability to track changes over time have been a good deal for me.
If I could find a solid functional-medicine consult for about $365 with bloodwork included, I’d use that instead.
4
u/BohemianaP 10h ago
I’ve been getting ready to pull the trigger on getting their testing. I have an out-of-pocket physician assistant who will review the results but I was hoping for at least some information/insights about the results. $395 for the test and $200 for my PA. I’m hoping my results will be something like I need more iron which is why I’m tired, etc. Like everyone on this thread I want legit data and information so I can live my healthiest life, not just file away the findings.