The Drosophila melanogaster Genetic Reference Panel
Mackay, Richards et al., Nature
North Carolina State University's Trudy Mackay and her colleagues present the Drosophila melanogaster Genetic Reference Panel, "a community resource for analysis of population genomics and quantitative traits."
Debating the Merits of Personal Genomics
March 15, 2010
Actress Glenn Close made news last week when she had her DNA fully sequenced. Since then, the blogosphere has been buzzing with opinions on whether Close was smart or stupid to get her genetic map laid out in such detail. In Sunday's Times Online, Camilla Long spoke out against such personal genetic testing, saying DNA, in this case, stands for "Do Not Ask." What kind of impact would it have on a person's mental state, she asks, if they found out they had a genetic predisposition to Alzheimer's or alcoholism? What if health insurance companies started rejecting people on the basis of pre-existing genetic conditions? Better not to know, she says. But Genetic Future's Daniel MacArthur says willful ignorance is no argument against personal genomics. He says there's no evidence that learning of a future disease could harm someone's mental health, and that that notion is unsupported by current studies. As for who would want to know about risk for heart disease, or alcoholism? If someone knows about their risk for heart disease, they can take steps early on to prevent it, MacArthur says. Even if a person were to find out that Alzheimer's was inevitable, they could at least put their affairs in order and make sure they had long-term care. "If Long wishes to stay ignorant of her own genetic risks ... that should be her choice. But her criticism of others who choose to pursue a greater understanding of their own genetic risk is entirely, horrendously misplaced," he writes.
Everyone is at multiple high
Everyone is at multiple high risk for some dreaded diseases or disorders - as Steve Quake revealed with his own genome.
Once insurance companies realize they need to reject everyone to eliminate the high risks, will they go out of business and go away? No such luck.
In regard to discrimination
In regard to discrimination due to genetic predisposition, she should look up the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act; signed, as many of us know, by George W Bush in 2008.
We need everyone one to have
We need everyone one to have their DNA scanned and recorded for a number of reasons.
As we pour more money into this research the costs will drop until recording the entire sequence is the standard. Once we have statistically meaningful results from hundreds of millions of individuals many gene based diseases will be revealed.
On this basis many illnesses will be reduced in frequency and may eventually become history.More data will indicate how solid certain indications are as to susceptibility to alcoholism and so forth. Prospective parents will determine their risks early in the relationship.
Genetic scanning might be a precondition for enrolment in public medical care which will eliminate the fear of discrimination entirely and move medicine to prevention which might make it more affordable. This will entail more personal accountability as the individual will be counselled as to their susceptibilities if any as to their personal behavior.
On the plus side extremely positive genetic profiles will appear for many talents and these can be replicated more frequently. Certainly any woman today can easily upgrade her potential offspring through resources like Fairfax Cryobank.
Mike, your comments whiff of
Mike, your comments whiff of eugenics
GENA prevents health
GENA prevents health insurance companies from discriminating based on genetic information. However, life insurance companies may discriminate as much as they like.