Annie Clayton - Forum 3

Annie Clayton - Forum 3

by Deleted user -
Number of replies: 3

Mainstream DNA testing is an intriguing, yet an apprehensive practice that has recently taken modern households and Christmas gift list by storm. Not only does the person being tested benefit from this occurrence, but the companies that test and send out the test kits do as well. Companies such as 23 & Me, Genos, and Veritas market their test kits as ways to empower the average person with the knowledge of their genetic history and family background. 23 & Me even when as far as to get a movie marketing sponsorship with Despicable Me 2 to promote their testing kits internationally.

The kits a person is sent include a test tube and some directions. The individual is then promoted to extract saliva into the test tube and send it back to the company for testing. 23 & Me’s website claims the sample is then qualitatively genotyped against a sample sequence with “normal” genes. Other companies, such as Veritas, say that 23 & Me only sequence 1% of your genome, as opposed to Veritas sequences your “whole” genome. I feel this is unlikely as its very time consuming and expensive to sequence a person’s entire genome from just a saliva sample and this method would prove extremely cost-ineffective.

On this note, saliva is an innovative way of testing a genome; however, some limitations apply to this technique. Discrepancies could arise from inaccurate sample collection or testing. Other discrepancies include the fact that generic sequencing looks at positions of interest on the genome. These positions of interest were determined by similar samples from people with the same genetic mutations having the same positions of interest. There could be a discrepancy in this form of testing, as the idea of DNA testing has could a long way from Mendel but is still the most intricate form of biology yet to be tackled.

If I were to take a DNA test and the results showed I had a genetic mutation that could alter the timeline of my life, I may take a second to rethink my plans. My friend who's grandmother recently passed from Alzheimer’s Disease contemplates this question frequently. There are pros and cons to knowing your fate when you have no control over it. She says if he ever were to get DNA tested and the results showed she had a predisposition from Alzheimer’s disease, she would get further testing done, talked to a more specialized physician, and reevaluate her life plans, choices, and goals.

Personally, I would not want to be DNA tested and like to continue live in ignorant bliss of the life I am bound to live anyway. Another problem with DNA testing is the mass collection of a people’s individual genetic identities. I do not feel comfortable with a company, who can be bought or hacked, having my DNA. Insurance companies could use this information to increase premiums or change plans for something you cannot control. Privacy is valuable in individual healthcare.

From a “greater good” perspective of healthcare, DNA testing is extremely beneficial. DNA testing should consensual and have an extremely honest policy. If this practice is going to be privatized, the companies should hold the individual’s privacy to the highest standard. I think DNA testing is essential to furthering human knowledge regarding genetic disorders but is a tricky landscape to map as far as a collection of samples and from what population the samples are collected from.

23andMe. (n.d.). DNA Genetic Testing & Analysis. Retrieved from https://www.23andme.com/?new=true

Whole Genome Sequencing and Interpretation: myGenome. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.veritasgenetics.com/myGenome

Rutherford, A. (2018, October 15). How Accurate Are Online DNA Tests? Retrieved from https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-accurate-are-online-dna-tests/


616 words

In reply to Deleted user

Re: Annie Clayton - Forum 3

by Deleted user -
I think that your forum brings up a lot of good points and is very accurate. You went into a lot of detail about the types of DNA companies and how they work. I liked the point about how Veritas says they use the "whole" genome when testing peoples DNA and agree that it would be really hard for them to do so. It seems like for the price you pay, they wouldn't want to go into that much detail and it can make you wonder how different companies really take their findings seriously. For a DNA test to hit right on the nose I feel like it would need to be more expensive for companies to be more accurate. I agree with what you said at the end about the greater good perspective. A persons DNA should not be taken lightly and companies should do everything in their power to keep the patients testing samples confidential and do so in a professional manner.

164 words

In reply to Deleted user

Re: Annie Clayton - Forum 3

by Deleted user -
I agree with you, I think that companies cannot be trusted to keep a persons information secret. I also talked about how important DNA research and genetic research are for the greater good of humanity. I think that DNA is really the key to helping prevent a lot of disorders and I think that gene therapy is a great way to improve people's lives. There are really interesting ways that this could be expanded. I do see a big problem with protection of peoples information. Protection of data should be paramount to this type of company. I really like how well researched yours is.

104 words

In reply to Deleted user

Re: Annie Clayton - Forum 3

by Deleted user -
I like how you brought up the idea of not having any control really over your fate. When I was writing my forum I could not figure out if I would want to know my genetic mutations or not and the main reason I would not want to is because of that idea of not having control. It is kind of inevitable if you're predisposed to a certain condition. I had not thought of the idea of potential databases getting hacked which I could see happening even more in the future due to technological advances. Privacy is something that should stay constant in healthcare and I think it is important that we put that as a priority. Do you think it is possible to keep privacy a priority with all the technological advancements occurring (everything seems hackable)?

137 words