Testing times for the consumer genetics revolution
By Donna Dickenson,
New Scientist
| 01. 13. 2014
IT'S 2008. The New Yorker is chronicling a celebrity "spit party", at which notables – nicknamed the "Spitterati" – eject saliva into tubes to find out their risk of developing illnesses such as diabetes, heart disease and cancer. The firm involved is 23andMe, a direct-to-consumer genetic testing company whose service was named Invention of the Year by Time magazine.
Fast-forward five years. 23andMe receives a demand from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to stop selling its health-related tests pending scientific analysis. In a separate event, a Californian woman, Lisa Casey, files a $5 million class action lawsuit alleging false and misleading advertising. 23andMe suspends sales of its test, putting paid to its target of reaching 1 million customers by the end of 2013. Where did it all go wrong?
In November, after what the FDA describes as years of "diligently working to help [23andMe] comply with regulatory requirements", the agency sent a scathing letter to the firm's CEO Anne Wojcicki. It stated that 23andMe's Personal Genome Service was marketed without approval and broke federal law, since six years...
Related Articles
By Carl Zimmer, The New York Times | 06.04.2026
Scientists at Columbia University have edited the DNA of early human embryos with unprecedented accuracy, an achievement that could open the way to babies engineered with particular characteristics.
The prospect has fueled controversy for years. On the one hand, the...
By Alexandre Piquard, Le Monde [cites CGS' Katie Hasson] | 05.22.2026
"If proven to be safe, we believe preventive gene editing could be one of the most important health technologies of the century." This is how Lucas Harrington explained the goal of his company Preventive: to create genetically modified babies. Trying...
By Daniel Shanahan, Los Angeles Review of Books | 05.31.2026
This is the 15th installment in the Legacies of Eugenics series, which features essays by leading thinkers devoted to exploring the history of eugenics and the ways it shapes our present. You can read the first part here. The series...
By Sofia Resnick, Stateline | 05.20.2026
An anti-abortion group last month sued seven Utah fertility clinics, claiming their disposal of embryos as part of the in vitro fertilization process violates the state’s wrongful death law.
The ministry Voice for the Voiceless believes it has a strong...