May I ask what about the programming was detremental to you? It is always hard to know the outcomes of our actions until much later, but thus far I think that the label and programming has been beneficial for my dd in terms of her self-image and enjoyment of learning.
If a kid is a gifted athlete, they're usually described as "a gifted athlete." Not just plain "gifted." It's a big difference. I think one of the major problems of the label as it's currently used is that kids are given the label as if it applies across the board. But it is almost impossible to find children who universally gifted across the board. Everybody has strengths and weaknesses. But if you're "gifted," why would you have weaknesses?
As I got into high school and college, and the differences between me and my supposedly non-gifted classmates narrowed, I suddenly had to really work hard. I was at a huge disadvantage when I started some very difficult science courses and essentially flunked out, because by the time I figured out how to study and work through adversity, it was too late. I remember feeling so humiliated when I was talking with a bright girl from my high school (NOT in the gifted program) who said (about organic chemistry), "You shouldn't find it hard. It doesn't take a genius -- you're way smart enough for this." She was actually trying to be nice, but I realized she was right: organic chemistry doesn't take a genius. All it requires is discipline and hard work, skills that I had never developed despite being in gifted programs since early childhood. At that point, it was too late to catch up. I had to drop out of my science classes, something I still regret.
Anyhow, we're not going to get my DS's IQ tested at this point. We're supplementing extensively at home right now and it is working so far. Maybe we'll change our minds later, but given my experience I'm very, very wary.