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 Darren Incorvaia, Fierce Biotech | 07.16.2026
Jennifer Doudna, Ph.D., the Nobel Laureate best known for co-inventing the CRISPR system that has become the foundation for gene editing, is dipping her toes into a new, buzzy field: AI-powered protein design.
In a new paper, published today...
By Risa Cromer, The Conversation | 07.17.2026
By Emily Packard Dawson and Lainie Friedman Ross , The Hastings Center for Bioethics | 07.16.2026
Major news outlets recently reported – based on a bioRxiv preprint – that scientists had edited genes in human embryos with “startling precision.” The scientists’ decision to release this work ahead of peer review, coupled with the extensive media coverage...
Media coverage of recent developments in embryo gene editing might seem to suggest that gene-edited babies are close to becoming a reality. As tech billionaires eager to profit off of techno-eugenics invest in “designer baby” technologies, attempts to normalize heritable genome editing – which remains unsafe and raises significant ethical and societal concerns – are especially dangerous. It’s worth taking a closer look at these developments and what they mean, in a way that pushes back on narratives normalizing the...