Manuel Corpas' Blog

Genomes, Web 2.0 and Bioethics

My Personal Exome Now Publicly Released

After 5 months of having performed the sequencing of my personal exome, I now make it available to the community for public use. I release it under a CC BY-SA 3.0 license, giving you permission to use this data in any way, as long as it provides attribution to the source and it is shared under a similar license.

What is an exome?

An exome is the ~1% of my genome that encodes for proteins.

Why do I release my personal exome?

When my family and myself made our genotypes available through the Internet, we immediately received results from researchers around the world who took our data for analysis and came back with interesting results. As a result of this, we have been able to learn much about ourselves. I have reported this in a previous entry on this blog entitled “Benefits for Publishing Family Genomes on the Internet“. I now follow the same principle: if I make my exome available for people to analyse it, I can expect that some researchers may come back with interesting results.

What data do I actually release?

I release my 4 FastQ files that were given to me by my sequencing provider. This is the same kind of information that 23andMe gives in their current exome analysis offer. This information basically consists of raw reads that need to be aligned to a reference assembly. Once aligned, interesting variation data can be inferred.

What do I ask in return?

Nothing. I do appeal though to the good will of potential users to report back to me anything interesting they might find.

How big are the files?

They are huge. On average they are about 0.6 Gb per file and I have 4 of these. That means that it can take several hours for each file to be downloaded. Be patient!

Where can I get them?

Here:

  1. File 1
  2. File 2
  3. File 3
  4. File 4

Read the rest of this entry »

Filed under: Genomics, Personal, Personal Genomes, , ,

Converting Genes and Genomic Features From NCBI36 to GRCh37

The Human Genome is a like map where features and genes are mapped to. As techniques improve, our fine-grained resolution for that map increases and new versions are released every few years. When a new coordinate reference map (or assembly) for the Human Genome is released, it produces lots of headaches for those who work in the field as it means that the locations of genes, chromosomal bands and other features like Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) or Copy Number Variation (CNVs) change.

In order to have the most up-to-date version for the Human Genome set of genes and features sometimes it is necessary to convert from one assembly to another. In the past I have written a tutorial on how to remap from NCBI36 to GRCh37 human assemblies using liftOver. In this tutorial I present a simple step-by-step guide for feature remapping using NCBI’s remapping tool.

Important:

Please make sure you know in advance the assembly to which your aberration data is currently mapped to. If by mistake you remap an aberration already in GRCh37 to GRCh37 you will get new coordinates for the region mapped to the wrong coordinates.

The NCBI provides a web facility to convert coordinates from one assembly into another. To convert coordinates using their genome remapping service do the following:

  1. Make sure that your data is in BED format,  e.g. “chr3            100000 999990 myId0000123” -> CNV aberration in NCBI36/hg18
  • Please note that each field is separated by a tab and each line by a character return. Please follow this strictly or the remapping tool may throw an error.
  • Add as many lines as aberrations you would like to remap
  1. Go to the NCBI Remap page:
  1. Select “Organism for source data” Homo Sapiens, “Source Assembly” NCBI36 (hg18) and “Target Assembly” GRCh37 (hg19)
  2. Please leave all “Remapping Options” (Minimum ratio of bases that must remap, etc) with default values
  3. Select for “Input format” BED, “Output format” Same as input
  4. Paste your aberration in the input box where it says “Paste data here” and hit submit at the bottom of the page
  5. Wait until results are returned
  6. To retrieve results download “Mapping Report”, which is in excel format or alternatively Mapping report Sample in the results page

Please note that your aberration may remap to more than one location. I recommend that you manually check the coordinates and select the most appropriate of the doubly remapped aberration in the new assembly. Please also note that your aberration may not remap because the region is partially or entirely deleted in the new assembly or split in GRCh37. In this case I recommend that you use another start or end point position, maybe use the start/end of alternative probes until you find a region where it maps.

Another possibility could be to look at the genes for the region in the old assembly and select a region in GRCh37 that includes the same genes as in NCBI36. Each of these solutions requires careful deliberation and may not be applicable to your particular case (e.g. genes in different chromosomes would not allow remapping based on genes).

Filed under: Bioinformatics, Genomics, Tutorials, , , ,

A Family Experience of Personal Genomics Paper Out

I have the pleasure to announce the publishing of the case study “A Family Experience of Personal Genomics” by the Journal of Genetic Counseling today. An accompanying Commentary Note written by ethicist Anna Middleton is also published. Both papers are open access. [Correction: these papers will be open access shortly.]

The case study paper is an invited contribution for the Journal of Genetic Counseling in a special issue on Direct-To-Consumer (DTC) genetic testing. This paper describes the journey I went through with my family when we all embarked into analysing our personal genomes via a DTC genetic testing company. I believe my experiences could be related to many other people in the world as they gain access to this technology. In the commentary Dr Middleton discusses the implications of the difficulties I went through when communicating my relatives their genomic information.

Filed under: Computational Bioethics, Genomics, , , , , , ,

Beware of Gene Names in Excel

For the past few days I have been trying to compile the list of gene names that is the most complete possible. To start with, I was given an initial list of genes in an excel file that was taken from the HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee (HGNC). Unfortunately, the gene names were pasted from the original source (HGNC) to an Excel spreadsheet without modifying the expected format of the column cells. This led to Excel trying to “help” with the formatting of the value inserted, changing those gene names that are similar to dates to an actual date. In the bioinformatics field, misnaming a gene can lead to disastrous consequences such as misdiagnosis of a causal gene in a clinical setting. Thus:

Beware of pasting gene names in an Excel spreadsheet with a default format, as these may be changed into dates.

From my current list of 19,026 genes that I have compiled as of now, here are the names of the genes that have been automatically changed by Excel into dates. In the table below, the first column denotes the date the gene name is changed to, the middle column the Ensembl ID of the gene and the right column the actual name that was changed by Excel into a date.

Sep-01    ENSG00000180096        SEPT1    
Sep-02    ENSG00000168385        SEPT2
Sep-03    ENSG00000100167        SEPT3
Sep-04    ENSG00000108387        SEPT4
Sep-05    ENSG00000184702        SEPT5
Sep-06    ENSG00000125354        SEPT6
Sep-07    ENSG00000122545        SEPT7
Sep-08    ENSG00000164402        SEPT8
Sep-09    ENSG00000184640        SEPT9
Sep-10    ENSG00000186522        SEPT10
Sep-11    ENSG00000138758        SEPT11
Sep-12    ENSG00000140623        SEPT12
Sep-14    ENSG00000154997        SEPT14

Mar-01    ENSG00000145416        MARCH1
Mar-02    ENSG00000099785        MARCH2
Mar-03    ENSG00000173926        MARCH3
Mar-04    ENSG00000144583        MARCH4
Mar-05    ENSG00000198060        MARCH5
Mar-06    ENSG00000145495        MARCH6
Mar-07    ENSG00000136536        MARCH7
Mar-08    ENSG00000165406        MARCH8
Mar-09    ENSG00000139266        MARCH9
Mar-10    ENSG00000173838        MARCH10
Mar-11    ENSG00000183654        MARCH11

Dec-01    ENSG00000173077        DEC1

 

Filed under: Bioinformatics, Genomics, Tutorials, ,

myKaryoView Paper Out

As of October 26th 2011, a paper about the myKaryoView tool has been published in PLoS One. myKaryoView is a genome browser specifically designed for visualization of Direct-to-Consumer (DTC) personal genetic data. We look forward to receiving feedback from users visualizing their own personal genomes and developers willing to extend further the code or simply make use of myKaryoView in a different context.

The paper is freely available and open access.

Citation: Jimenez RC, Salazar GA, Gel B, Dopazo J, Mulder N, et al. (2011) myKaryoView: A Light-Weight Client for Visualization of Genomic Data. PLoS ONE 6(10): e26345. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0026345

Filed under: Bioinformatics, Genomics, Personal Genomes, , , , ,

Genomic Technologies in the Clinic: Challenges and Opportunities

Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) offers the promise of revolutionizing our ability to diagnose genetic disorders. Fuelled by the exponential decrease in the cost of sequencing, NGS can now be outsourced, making it accessible to labs with modest budgets. A personal exome (the sum of all coding regions in a genome) is currently priced at $999 by some providers. Although not as comprehensive as whole genome sequencing, exomes provide the ability to shed light on the origin of causative mutations lying on genes.

Exome Sequencing

                                    (by SarahKusala, CC-BY 3.0)

Getting the raw sequence data is the easy part. The challenging part is to extract and interpret clinically the genomic variation found in the raw data. The extraction of variants from raw NGS data can be influenced by many factors such as the sequence read depth, the alignment of reads and the variant calling algorithm. If one is to find the variants that may be of clinical relevance, filtering is required. This filtering may be performed by comparing genome data against data from the “normal” variation found in the 1000genomes project and dbSNP. Depending on the length of the mutation, there are three main kinds of variants: SNPs, indels and CNVs. SNPs constitute single point mutations (one DNA base), Indels insertions or deletions of up to about 1Kb and CNVs deletions or duplications from 1Kb to many megabases long.

It is well known, however, that many SNPs fall into locations that are far from genes, yet they can cause phenotypic effects. But assuming that one is looking at coding regions, many pieces of software have been developed to predict the effects of SNP mutations: stop codons, missense mutations and frameshifts.

Indels and CNVs are slightly harder to interpret clinically. CNVs can encompass many genes and their phenotypic effect cannot be clearly established unless several patients have been observed with a similar CNV. It is not uncommon for a normal individual to carry hundreds of indels and CNVs.

Challenges

One of the most important challenges in the clinic when implementing genomics is going to be how to deal with the huge amounts of data produced. There is going to be a great number of patients sequenced, all of them producing a huge number of genomic features of unknown significance. Given that in order to confidently interpret a rare variant it is needed to have evidence from several patients, it is not surprising that another big challenge is how this information is going to be shared. A lot more data about a patient means that the chances of personal identification are increased even if this information is anonymous. Thinking about a few routinely carried out tests today, it is possible to uniquely identify a person only with a handful of SNPs. Imagine when one possesses thousands of genomic variants from one patient.

Moreover, if this data is to be shared, a big challenge is going to be how it is going to be compared. Different labs have different Quality Control (QC) standards and different platforms. Each sequencing run may have different read depths and different levels of confidence in terms of whether a called variant is true. Another issue will be how the annotation of phenotypes will be carried out. There are phenotypic ontologies like the Human Phenotype Ontology, that allows a reasonably complete set of clinical descriptions. Nevertheless there is no guarantee that phenotypic descriptions even using the same ontology will have the same level of annotation. All these factors are going to need consideration when interpreting NGS in the clinic.

One of the main hurdles impairing the access of NGS to the clinic can also be the health system in the country. The UK seems to have been able for now to put together many state funded clinical labs to work together. Unfortunately, this would be unthinkable in countries like Spain, where instead of 1 unique health system, there are 17, as many as autonomous regions there are. Sequencing technologies require a lot of different sectors coordinating together in order to set up the appropriate platforms that guarantee the access of the technology, its proper interpretation and the protection of the patient’s privacy.

Opportunities

The other side of the coin is that these technologies are going to become increasingly affordable, not just for the rich countries but also for the emerging. The accessibility of this technology will make it ubiquitous in many labs around the world, not just to those looking for diagnosis of patients with genomic disorders. Expect sequencing routinely performed for cancer tissues and even at birth. Based on current estimates, it is likely that by 2020 there will be hundreds of millions of genomes sequenced.

Conclusion

Sequencing is going to revolutionize clinical practice. The degree to which it will revolutionize it depends on how we harness the challenges described above. There will be technical problems but also institutional ones that are more problematic to solve. The race for harnessing NGS in the clinical setting is on.

Filed under: Genomics, Opinion, Technology, , , , , , ,

A Genome Blogger Manifesto

Have you ever wondered why some people have no reparation in sharing their genetic profiles? Why do they openly talk about something supposedly so private? I believe that no contradiction exists between wanting to protect one’s privacy yet sharing one’s genomic data with the world. I am more concerned about the information that Facebook collects about my profile than my genome data (provided that I live in a country where there I public health).

Sharing and comparing one’s genome with other personal genomes is a matter of necessity if one is to shed light on the meaning of one’s personal DNA.

This is why I became a genome blogger myself. Why one should be constrained by the information that genomic test reports provide? No personal genome analysis report can ever be complete, they will always be influenced by the biases of whomever is providing such a report.

*   *   *

Although no formal document seems to have been produced on what the core values for genome blogging should be yet, core beliefs driving personal genome-sharing should be made explicit. Here I present an initial and inherently imperfect first attempt to put in writing of what I believe genome blogger values could be. I do not expect every fellow blogger to agree with them, but I hope that at least they inspire some debate. These are not a fixed set of rules; on the contrary, I expect this thinking to evolve with the genomics technology itself. I base some of the ideas below on Marcus Wohlsen’s ‘Biopunk’ book, Meredith Patterson’s ‘biopunk manifesto’, Misha Angrist’s ‘Here is a human being’ book and Pekka Himanen’s ‘Hacker’s ethics’ book.

Core Values for Genome Blogging

  1. Intelligent exploration, experimentation and trial to push the boundaries of knowledge are a right for ordinary people. The days in which genetic science was only done by university professors or people working in corporate labs are now over. Now everyone should have the power and legitimacy to be able to discover, develop and find new things about their own genome data. Read the rest of this entry »

Filed under: Bioinformatics, Computational Bioethics, Genomics, Personal, Personal Genomes, , , , , , , , ,

Getting My Genome Sequencing Done (Part II)

The purpose of this exercise is to demonstrate how to get one’s genome sequenced to those without previous experience. I will build on part one of this story, in which I explained how I tried to contact several companies who might sequence my genome. In that post there was one company I did not mention on purpose, the BGI. This post is going to be mainly about my story on how I sequenced all my gene coding regions (also known as exome) with BGI’s help, for which I am very grateful. The BGI was in fact the only company that replied to me and was interested in supporting my adventures in direct-to-consumer personal genomics.

I was able to have personal contact with the BGI in June 2011, when I, and my collaborator Rafael Jimenez, presented them our plans for developing a free open source platform for self-analysis of personal genomes. This story is a key part of that enterprise in which we have already invested so much. I hope that interested readers may find some of these experiences helpful, especially if they are thinking of sequencing their genomes.

Our initial goal with the BGI was to get the sequencing of my family’s genomes for free. After several weeks of negotiation, it was clear that the best they could offer me was their cheapest deal, a personal exome sequencing for $999. This in itself was a big success for me, largely because sequencing a single genome is not profitable for a company, as I dicovered when I spoke to Complete Genomics who would only consider a minimum of 8 genomes per experiment. At current prices this would be unaffordable even with sponsorship. Second, with contact with the BGI already established, there was the possibility that my whole family might be able to have our genomes sequenced sooner rather than later.

Even though I did not have the money to be able to pay for my exome, I optimistically accepted BGI’s offer, and decided on sequencing my own exome. It was clear that whilst I would be able to send them a sample any time, they would only do the sequencing as soon they received the money. It turned out that the money arrived to Hong Kong, where BGI’s bank account is located, before the sample. In less than three days I found a generous undisclosed Spanish sponsor who agreed to pay in full the sequencing of my exome. The currency to be paid in was euros, so the final sum was 712 euros. Apart from that, I myself paid the cost of sending the sample, out of my own pocket, using DHL. The total cost for this was £45.95.

DHL Sample Shipment Receipt

Finding the right kind of DNA sample to be sent was the difficult bit. BGI initially asked for either purified DNA or a blood sample. Neither of these options were feasible for me, because here in the UK is next to impossible to extract one’s blood if it’s not for health-related purposes. Sending DNA was not an option either because I am not a wet-lab scientist and did not have easy access to DNA purification kits. Besides, for this exercise, in which I am trying to emulate an ordinary citizen with no lab access, those options would not be feasible anyway. The solution was Oragene Kits from DNA Genotek. If you are a 23andMe customer, you will know that you spit saliva into a test tube which then gets shipped to the US. Oragene kits contain a stabilizing solution that breaks down all DNA degradation enzymes naturally contained in cells. Their DNA yields from saliva are as good as from blood samples. One can send these Oragene kits at room temperature with no need to keep the sample cool with ice, as it is the case if one sends blood.

Manuel spitting in Oragene kit for DNA extraction from saliva (photo taken by Sito Torres)

I found on the DNA Genotek website that they provide 4 sample tubes for anyone to try at no cost. I sent them a request for free sample kits and the following day they called me on the phone to check what may plans were. I did not have to pay any money at all and in less than a week they had sent me enough spit tubes for me and for my parents (we hope they will be sequenced in the near future), all the way from Canada. I would like to take this chance to recommend DNA Genotek’s sample kits; they have worked really well for me.

I still had to negotiate with the BGI the shipment of saliva (instead of blood) and also the extraction of the DNA. Very kindly the sales people from the BGI agreed to try a saliva protocol for DNA extraction for free. In all respects, I am very grateful to the BGI for the impeccable service I have received. There was one last obstacle that had to be sorted before I sent my saliva sample. The Hong Kong government requires an import license for biological materials, blood and saliva included. Fortunately the sample management team at the BGI took care of this. We calculated that the sample would arrive during the first week of August (2011). The license stated the sample arrival date would be around the 1st of August. It actually reached Hong Kong slightly sooner but this did not seem to be a problem for the customs authorities.

Finally on the 6th of September I received an email from the BGI project manager who informed me that my exome was ready for download. The delivery date in fact was almost a month earlier than the one initially agreed, so from that point of view I am also grateful to the BGI. I downloaded 4 files from their ftp site taking a total of ~2.7 Giga Bytes of data, which is less than I thought. However, it still took me 4 hours to download the whole thing (even though I had a fast Internet connection). These files are in FASTQ format. Here is the first read of one of the files:

@FCD044UACXX:4:1101:1778:2233#CAGATCAT/2
CTTGGATAAAAGGAAAATTTTGAACATGGGACCCTGACTTAATGAATATTTGAATGTTNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNTCAAGTGTCGT
+
__aeccacgggce`ffheghhhiiiiihhhbfc_fghfhifhdhgihbghedb[egfeBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB

This is the end of the series on Getting My Genome Sequencing Done. There will be a new series coming up called Getting my Genome Analysis Done.

Filed under: Genomics, Personal, , , , ,

Getting My Genome Sequencing Done (Part I)

Readers of this blog may have come across the experiment my family did with Direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing. We analyzed all our samples using 23andMe kits and started sharing and writing about our personal genome data. This experience has changed me dramatically as a person and researcher.  I started off as a bioinformatician with an interest in risks of genetic variants but now these experiences have helped me develop a real insight into the psychology of how these variants may impact on people’s reactions. As a family, we are truly experiencing a really positive and unexpected response from people contacting us via the Internet who are willing to tell us their findings about our family data.

After doing our whole genome genotypes, the next obvious step is to have our whole genomes sequenced. There is quite a lot of debate at the moment as to whether genome sequencing should be accessible to the general public and if so, to what extent. But I figured out that if “the rich and famous” can have their genome sequenced, perhaps with a bit of luck, the “ordinary and poor” (among which I include myself), could have a chance, even with zero budget. Zero budget for this exercise was an essential point of principle, given that we really would not be able to afford even a 10th of the price a genome currently costs (around $9,500; probably cheaper than this price by the time you are reading this).

I wasn’t sure how to do this, but I know that this might be possible and that we would get it done if we could. So I went onto the Internet and searched for whole genome sequencing. I found three potential good candidates that could do it on demand: Complete Genomics, the Illumina personal sequencing services and the Beijin Genomics Institute (BGI).  So the first thing I did, I sent them an email. Given that we had no money to spend and that there is no such a thing as free lunch, we thought that we needed to offer something substantial in return since we were asking them to waive us the fee of ~$50,000. The only substantial thing we could really offer was publicity, so the following proposal was sent to those three companies via their websites:

Dear Sir/Madam: I would like to offer you a deal/proposal. My family would like to have their whole genome sequenced with your company. In exchange for releasing to the public openly and freely on the Internet our genomes we thought you could sponsor us. This action could attract *a lot of attention* to [company name], as this is a pioneering move. Currently a very limited set of people are actually interested in sequencing their genomes. The only way you can reach the ordinary citizen (sooner rather than later) is if ordinary people, like my family publish their experiences and pave the way. My family, an ordinary family, constitutes an example of what this technology could do for any ordinary person, not just a scientist, etc. In addition to this, I want to fully research all of the social/ethical implications that publishing this information can bring. We also hope to share this information with the world. Currently all my family has genotyped their genomes with 23andMe and put all this data in the Internet for free download: http://manuelcorpas.com/five-family-relatives-genome-download/ To our knowledge, this is the first time that anything like that has been done. In barely a month since this information has been published, four different analyses from specialists/hobbyists have reached us, making us learn that dad, for example, is lactose intolerant [1]. Our point is that now, with DNA sequence providers, the door opens for DIY genome mining. The power of the Internet and computers may bring this technology to computer savvy people. For example, our 23andMe genomes are now been taken by SNPedia and several other ancestry projects such as Eurogenes and Artemis: http://www.snpedia.com/index.php/User:Manuelcorpas http://bga101.blogspot.com/2011/03/mds-analysis-of-southern-europe.html http://dioegenesartemis.blogspot.com/2011/04/first-results.html Although up to date the information provided by 23andMe has not revealed any nasty surprises about our genomes, we are aware that now anyone can report new findings that were not initially discovered in our genomes. We believe, however, that as a family we can gain a lot more than lose by sharing our genome data with the world. I believe my proposal could bring a lot of exposure to [company name] and therefore would request whether you could consider this offer. Best wishes, Manuel

Illumina never got back to us. Looking around we learned that their policy is that sequencing should be done with medical prescription. Fair enough.

I couldn’t wait long so I continued researching the matter and found Complete’s contact phone number on their website, so I rang them. To my surprise I was put through and the person was very polite with me and keen to listen to what I had to say. Since I have learned that Complete had already sequenced and published 69 genomes, available via this website:

http://www.completegenomics.com/sequence-data/download-data/

Among these genomes there is a multigenerational family with a bigger pedigree than the one I was proposing. This obviously meant that our offer wasn’t as innovative as we initially thought of. It seems that Complete Genomics will not do (at least for the time being) “Direct-to-consumer” business, but that still, their goal is to become the “Intel Inside” for human genome sequencing efforts, the technology underlying most human genome analyses. I thought that that was a cool objective if attainable.

I still didn’t give up. I tried to see whether there was a chance that Complete might change their mind, so I wrote to them about our incredibly interesting experience of family dynamics and family communication issues while discussing our personal genomes. So far we have not been lucky enough to get our genomes sequenced for free. Despite not achieving our outcome, there is a lot we have learned on the way though. What an interesting experience.

This is the end of part one on Getting My Genome Sequencing Done.

[1] This information was actually available in our 23andMe reports, but we missed it initially. We learned about this condition with the SNPedia tool Promethease

Filed under: Bioinformatics, Genomics, Personal Genomes, , ,

Not All Genetic Discrimination is Illegal in the US

It struck me that the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), the flagship US law against genetic discrimination, signed by President George W. Bush in 2008, does not cover life insurance, disability insurance, or long-term care insurance.

In other words, in the US it’s still possible to be discriminated against for genetic reasons. How is this situation likely to change in the near future?

When I look more closely at it in the NIH factsheet for GINA it is stated that

As genomic medicine is poised to revolutionize medicine, patients will be able to utilize advances in genetic testing to create highly personalized care and treatment plans without fear of discrimination.

I have two main objections with that:

  1. The current level of protection is not near enough to dissipate the fears for people to ‘utilize advances in genetic testing’. The law itself states that GINA sets a ‘minimum standard’ but still does not cover some crucial scenarios where being discriminated against may be devastating (e.g. life insurance).
  2. If Direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing is only going to be available via medical prescription, as many in the FDA are seeking to implement, does this approach help in any way the advancement of personalized health care? According to Misha Angrist [1], the top requestor for genetic tests in 2006 in the US was a Spa company; i.e. rich people with disposable income who wanted to understand their health risks. The impression I gather is that private demand is the main driver for DTC genetic testing and not the institutionalized health care. If the worst fears of DTC providers become a reality it may well be the end of an open, accessible, democratized personal genomics field as we now it. This does not take away the grave obligation DTC providers and relevant governmental agencies have to educate the public to ensure that they understand their results and that rigorous standards are met in reported findings.

Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act Factsheet

It also strikes me that, in GINA, concepts like ‘privacy’ and the ‘right not to know’ are not even mentioned. My family and I chose to share our genotypes with the world, which should be as respectable as not sharing this data in the strictest sense. Both being open or protective of one’s genetic data should be an informed personal choice and not something imposed. I thus think this should be an important aspect that remains to be addressed at the juridical level.

In the NIH GINA factsheet it also reads that

Insurers cannot use genetic information obtained intentionally or unintentionally in decisions about enrollment or coverage.

To my mind this means that there is no restriction in collecting genetic information even though it cannot be used. I’ve heard say that some insurers may be collecting genetic data in anticipation of changes in laws that would allow them future use of the data.

Ignorance is the worst possible kind of discrimination

The need to educate the public and help them make an informed decision on genetic testing should remain the single most important priority by governments and regulatory agencies alike. Trying to impose on the public tight regulations on access to DTC genetic testing may create the wrong public opinion and backfire in the same way as GM food and crops did in Europe. Now is the time, when opinions are still to be formed, to make people aware of what DTC can or can’t tell them about themselves. The worst form of discrimination I know is ignorance and only ignorance can lead to the wrong interpretation of test results. Perhaps the solution does not lie so much in restricting access to DTC genetics testing as it is in helping consumers choose the right option for themselves.

[1] Here Is a Human Being: At the Dawn of Personal Genomics (2010) HaperCollins Books.

Filed under: Computational Bioethics, Genomics, , , , , ,

Follow via Twitter

Disclaimer

Any views expressed here are the author's alone and do not necessarily form part of the official positions of his employer.

Creative Commons License
Unless otherwise stated, this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Recently Tweeted

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 211 other followers