Had Emile Zola and Ernst Ruedin been invited to last month's Genotype "Spit" Party, hosted by 23andMe in New York last month, the air of vindication would have gotten us all high. One can almost hear Emile, all ascot and jodsphurs...right arm rested on the crisp, epauletted shoulder of Herr Ruedin..."Finally! A way to see just how good a lass' stock really is!" With other things (like whether one's political inclination reveals itself genetically) on his mind, Ruedin gasps a teutonic ja, replying, "Endlich! Du bist absolut korrekt mein Freund..."
But alas, they were edged out on the guest list by the likes of Rupert Murdoch, Chevy Chase and of course, Harvey Weinstein, all of whom attended the shindig to hack in a little glass vial in the lobby of the opulent IAC Building. The party was hosted by Linda Avey and Anne Wojcicki, the two ladies behind the company 23andMe...as in chromosome pairs...clever no?
It appears the company https://www.23andme.com/ will take $399 and a vial of spit from the customer, ship the sample off to a lab where the DNA is placed on a chip that can analyze around six hundred thousand sections of the customer's genome. Then, three to four weeks later, the customer simply logs on and receives bio-technology's equivalent of a fortune cookie. In other words, the company is putting the STOCK back in stock portfolio...and how about their timing?!?
The company's homepage purports to "democratize personal genetics" (Ruedin beware) by providing its customers with information about one's health traits, ancestry and specific similar DNA patterns shared by family members and the community at large. Obviously, the concept of knowing the cards one has been dealt has serious implications for the field of personalized medicine, as it allows us to adjust accordingly to the threats we're at increased risk for. For example, it might be extremely useful for frequent flyers to know whether they suffer from deep-vein thrombosis as it would clue them off to stretch out and move around the cabin area a bit...maybe NOT have the fourth vodka gimlet. In relating a personal anecdote along those same lines, my parent units might have chose a different topping for my brother's 5th birthday cake had they known he was allergic to coconut, thereby saving the entire family a trip to St. Joseph's and tearing yours truly away from the Bears-Dolphins game. Some of you out there might remember our beloved Bears lost that game...the only loss on their way to shuffling to a Super Bowl celebration.
23andMe also surveys its customers about their hereditary quirks...be it sneezing three times no more no less in an arpeggio scale, feckles or birthmarks, or a left-eye twitch when leaving one's queen vulnerable (yes Wallace, I know...I've known for years!...the Cunningham tip-off!) The company intends to plot such outliers against genetic data to see what they'll find.
The ethical dilemmas extend much farther than the bio-medical or bio-technological fields. Say for instance, the Murphy's all take the chromosome challenge and discover no proneness whatsoever to premature male baldness...all 18 brothers, fathers, nephews and uncles took the spit test and all show a happy future of shampoos and haircuts. All except Little Eddy, who was born after the family had moved to Summerdale Ave., which fell within Cliff, the flirtatious but bald mailman's route. Pray for Mrs. Murphy.
Or, will it instead simply reinforce stereotypes...a Y chromosome very common in Jewish populations shows up on the stock card of a Polish Catholic...will this prompt individuals to return to what might have been their true roots...casting off the Vatican and keeping kosher?
I can already see match.com and eharmony scrambling to be the first to co-opt 23andMe...who am I kidding...I can already see my Official Match23 Date Card:
No: premature baldness, extreme coconut allergy, freckles after sun exposure, alcohol-flush
Yes: caffeine addiction, high risk for heart attack, insomnia, prone to vote for the losing candidate.
Merde (even Ruedin sighs Scheisse). JWD
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
This post inspired me to go check out the Web site. I am amazed. I had no idea this service existed.
I am wondering about the liability implications for a spouse, parent, or friend that sends the "spit" sample in without the consent of the other person. The Q&A section says that you can request tests for friends and family, and even give them as gifts. It seems like there should be some sort of consent form. I briefly googled for lawsuits surrounding 23 and me, but could not find anything, so apparently no one has had any serious problems thus far.
Anyways, I kind of want to do it! It is tempting in, isn't it?
Wow, Gattaca here we come. I can see the pre-nups already.
: "Should YFEMALE develop any signs of obesity or breast cancer(as it tends to run in the women in her lineage), XMALE has the right to terminate the marriage."
: "Should XMALE show any inclination of premature baldness (i.e. excessive hairloss) (as is prevalent between his father, grandfather, and so forth), YFEMALE is entitled to receive $100 per week from him until he signs up for membership in the Hair Club for Men."
On the other (not so extreme) hand, the idea of knowing one's health risks at such a specific level does seem extremely helpful to those risk-adverse individuals who want to live a longer life. There just has to be a way to monitor or limit this without it getting out of control. Perhaps allow results to only the specific individual who's genes are being tests? Protect such results under privacy laws from others who want to see them? There must be a way to synthesize the good effects of this advanced science without the looming aftereffects.
I had no idea genetic testing had become so commercialized. Nor did I know you could actually test for ear wax type or lactose-intolerance (as stated on the website).
However, I found it interesting that the website also included a list for tests on conditions and diseases that are inconclusive in regards to its potential to manifest in persons carrying the gene.
The site states:
"Research Reports give you information from research that has not yet gained enough scientific consensus to be included in our Clinical Reports. This research is generally based on high-quality but limited scientific evidence. Because these results have not yet been demonstrated through large, replicated studies, we do not perform complete quantitative analyses of their effects. We do, however, explain how they may–if confirmed–affect your odds of having or developing a trait, condition or disease."
I would imagine that given the accessibility of these tests, many would misunderstand the results of these tests, despite explanations on their part regarding the reports. I'd probably freak out at even the slightest chance that I inherited one of the serious conditions listed in that category.
Ellie
Post a Comment