With Consumer Genetic Testing, Buyer Beware
By Editorial,
The Boston Globe
| 09. 30. 2014
Untitled Document
THE ERA OF direct-to-consumer genetic testing means that anyone can pay $99, spit into a plastic vial, and get back a detailed readout on ancestry and risk factors for scores of diseases. At the forefront of this wave is Silicon Valley startup 23andMe, which has collected the DNA of 700,000 members since it was founded in 2006. This flood of data, however, raises a host of ethical questions that neither testing firms nor their customers may anticipate — especially when unwanted information invades customers’ lives.
The Food and Drug Administration moved last year to protect DNA testing consumers from being bombarded with alarming warnings and hard-to-interpret risk assessments about their health that might give rise to unnecessary procedures. Still, the company can provide consumers with the raw data, allowing them to find experts to interpret it for them. That’s a fair compromise: Americans should be able to obtain information about their genetic background; testing firms should be able to present that information with a minimum of hype.
Another source of controversy is 23andMe’s growing genetic database. As...
Related Articles
By Pallab Gosh and Gwyndaf Hughes, BBC News | 06.26.2025
Work has begun on a controversial project to create the building blocks of human life from scratch, in what is believed to be a world first.
The research has been taboo until now because of concerns it could lead to...
Since the “CRISPR babies” scandal in 2018, no additional genetically modified babies are known to have been born. Now several techno-enthusiastic billionaires are setting up privately funded companies to genetically edit human embryos, with the explicit intention of creating genetically modified children.
Heritable genome editing remains prohibited by policies in the overwhelming majority of countries that have any relevant policy, and by a binding European treaty. Support for keeping it legally off limits is widespread, including among scientists...
By Ron Leuty, San Francisco Business Times | 06.16.2025
23andMe's two-step sale to a nonprofit led by former CEO Anne Wojcicki is nothing more than a dance around California's genetic privacy law, state Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a filing late Monday, one day before a judge will...
By Ed Cara, Gizmodo | 06.22.2025
In late May, several scientific organizations, including the International Society for Cell and Gene Therapy (ISCT), banded together to call for a 10-year moratorium on using CRISPR and related technologies to pursue human heritable germline editing. The declaration also outlined...