Over the recent years, my father has been really interested in DNA testing in order to track his ancestor. However, what does it really mean to get DNA tested? Many companies offer genetic testing as more of a “fun test” to see if you have links to certain ancestries but there are tests out there that test for increased risks for things such as cancer or diabetes. But what if your test says that you have increased risk for a detrimental disease or even no risk for another? To the common folk, this could cause some life changing decisions for better or worse.
On the one hand, it may help someone to know if they have increased risk for lung cancer and cause them to stop smoking to quit their job that comes with bad air quality. However, on the other hand, someone who has no increased risk for lung cancer may think that they are “invincible” and not bother trying to quit smoking because they do not have genetic risk for lung cancer. The biggest ethical concern for drug tests is the fact that many are uneducated as to what their results mean. You could get results saying you have a high chance to get Alzheimer’s and many people may panic even though it does not mean that you will get Alzheimer’s; the test simply states that your genetics have a predisposition for Alzheimer’s that may or may not be fulfilled.
This then leads to whether or not you would want to know what your genes say about your health. People live their whole lives without knowing what their genetics say even if their test would come back with a lot of risks.
The choice is yours though, do you want to know what the future may hold for you? Or content not knowing because that future may never come to be?
Udesky, L. The ethics of direct-to-consumer genetic testing. The Lancet. 2010. 376(9750): 1377-1378.
Hey William,
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure if you've had Dr. Lucas yet for a genetics course, but you should 100% go and have a discussion with her regarding direct to consumer (DTC) genetic testing. She has some incredible insight and perception on how detrimental these consumer DNA tests really could be, aligning similarly with the concerns you've raised here. In our genetics course through our master's program, we recently covered the disadvantages and detrimental effects DTC genetic testing poses on society; specifically, how a growing number of new genetic tests are being offered to consumers with no health care provider intervention or genetic counseling whatsoever. Additionally, these DTC genetic tests generally only test for mutations in a handful of genes, while genetic screenings recommended by health care professionals test for mutations on thousands of genes. This presents the idea that these consumer tests are not entirely accurate, nor can they accurately provide insight to one's suseptibility or risk of acquiring a genetic disease. What is so detrimental about these genetic tests is the fact that they could be providing individuals with false or not entirely accurate information; for example, an individual's DTC genetic test could come back negative for breast cancer, so they're never worried about developing brest cancer in their life. However, the test only tested for a couple of genes, when in reality breast cancer can arise from mutation on hundreds of different genes. As a result of the false confidence the DTC genetic test provided them, they never get preventative screening done and end up developing breast cancer due to another genetic mutation not tested for in the genetic test. It's ideas like this that make DTC genetic tests potentially harmful to individuals. If you wanted to read more about it, I included the article that we discussed in class.
Hudson, K., Javitt, G., Burke, W., Byers, P., ASHG Social Issues Committee (2007). ASHG Statement on Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing in the United States. American Journal of Human Genetics, 81(3), 635–637.
Hi Billy,
ReplyDeletethis is such an interesting topic to me because I took genetics last semester and we talked about genetic testing quite a bit. I think that it could alter someones life knowing set information about themselves, which like you mention could either have an increased risk for a disease or not at all. Knowing that you may have an increased risk of breast cancer for example could potentially cause for the rest of the people in that family to go and get genetically tested. Which only poses the ethical question of, if your sibling found out they had a genetic mutation because they had some genetic testing done, would you wan't your sibling to tell you or would you rather have them sit down and have the doctor tell you? and how would that affect patient confidentiality in that scenario? Overall I think its good to be genetic testing done because it only necessarily tests for the mutation which only means that you could have the potential to develop a disease or not at all. So would you wan't to tell your family that you have an increased risk for breast cancer? or do you not ?
Reference for the comment above
ReplyDeleteOffit K, Groeger E, Turner S, Wadsworth EA, Weiser MA. The "Duty to Warn" a Patient's Family Members About Hereditary Disease Risks. JAMA. 2004;292(12):1469–1473. doi:10.1001/jama.292.12.1469