Why you shouldn’t know too much about your own genes
By Carolyn Johnson,
Washington Post
| 09. 11. 2015
Untitled Document
This summer, a panel of genetics experts did something surprising: they put out a list of genetic tests people should not get.
In the age of precision medicine, the genome is our oyster. There are cancer wonder drugs that pinpoint the errant genes that drive tumors. There are longstanding medical mysteries finally being unraveled by DNA sequencing. There is tremendous excitement over the coming age of treatments tailored to you. And there is also this: a very long list of genes for which the best medical understanding of what they mean for our health is essentially a shrug.
The poster child for the uncertainty underlying much of the information in this brave new world is a gene called MTHFR. It produces an important enzyme, but many medical geneticists simply sigh when they hear the gene's clumsy acronym name.
This gene has made its way on to the do-not-test list more than once, because in almost no cases do the tests have any medical utility. Meanwhile, alternative medicine practitioners and Web sites have stepped up their claims that many people --...
Related Articles
By Megan Molteni and Anil Oza, STAT | 10.07.2025
For two years, a panel of scientific experts, clinicians, and patient advocates had been hammering out ways to increase community engagement in National Institutes of Health-funded science. When they presented their road map to the NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya last...
Paula Amato & Shoukhrat Mitalipov
[OHSU News/Christine Torres Hicks]
On September 30th, a team of 21 scientists from Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) published a significant paper in Nature Communications, with a scientifically accurate but, to many, somewhat abstruse headline:
Induction of experimental cell division to generate cells with reduced chromosome ploidy
The lead authors were Shoukhrat Mitalipov, recently described here as “a push-the-envelope biologist,” and his long-term colleague Paula Amato. (Recall that in July the pair had co-published with...
By Pam Belluck, The New York Times | 10.17.2025
Before dawn on a March morning, Doug Whitney walked into a medical center 2,000 miles from home, about to transform from a mild-mannered, bespectacled retiree into a superhuman research subject.
First, a doctor inserted a needle into his back to...
By Julia Black, MIT Technology Review | 10.16.2025
Consider, if you will, the translucent blob in the eye of a microscope: a human blastocyst, the biological specimen that emerges just five days or so after a fateful encounter between egg and sperm. This bundle of cells, about the size of...
