The right to know your own DNA

[Brutha]

In Germany we lost it already, in the US congress might also erradiate it.

To quote on of the people on the relevant committee:
It's very difficult to protect the public from itself and it's desire to be healthy.

Your genes, your rights – FDA’s Jeffrey Shuren misleading testimony under oath | Gene Expression | Discover Magazine

[SnerpGoodWord]

I suspect, were this to pass in the US, it would not survive constitutional challenge on free speech grounds - namely the right of whoever's doing the gene sequencing to speak to their customers.

There are advantages to a constitution with strong enumerated rights.

[Brutha]

I suspect, were this to pass in the US, it would not survive constitutional challenge on free speech grounds - namely the right of whoever's doing the gene sequencing to speak to their customers.

I'm not sure about the constitutional question. Not every court case that fought based on the first amendment gets won. It's not that long ago that a case was lost with was about doctors giving advice to their patients.

I think it's easily possible to increase the legal liability to a point where it doesn't make sense to sell directly to customers without coming in conflict with the first amendment.

A women gets a DNA test with slows that she has a low probability of becoming breast cancer. As a result she doesn't go to as many screenings. Then she develops breast cancer and sues the DNA company for being responsible for her cancer.

It's probably not hard to build legislation that withstands legal challenge that would make such scenarios a potent threat.

[SnerpGoodWord]

I agree liability is a separate issue from a legal ban.

As your breast cancer example illustrates, I think there's a real possibility that knowing genetic information about yourself could be negatively correlated to medical outcomes in a lot of cases.

I think what should happen is that we leave things as they are for now, and see what happens. Once the net effect of genetic information on overall health becomes more clear, we can pick better policies. Right now we just don't know what will happen.

[metamorph]

Originally Posted by SnerpGoodWord

I agree liability is a separate issue from a legal ban.

As your breast cancer example illustrates, I think there's a real possibility that knowing genetic information about yourself could be negatively correlated to medical outcomes in a lot of cases.

I think what should happen is that we leave things as they are for now, and see what happens. Once the net effect of genetic information on overall health becomes more clear, we can pick better policies. Right now we just don't know what will happen.

I am with you on that one. The media and people in general are already paranoid. So let's not push it! (as long as we do not know more....)