Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Edward Rooney's avatar

Hi Steven. First of all, I'm a long-time reader and admirer of your work. Thank you for sharing everything you do.

Your argument that "25 years after the human genome was sequenced...there are almost no SNPs that tell you anything consequential about your health" is shortsighted. Given the rapidity of scientific understanding, those SNPs could become far more predictive as machine learning and population genetics advance. Data collected now could be reanalyzed with future tools to reveal health risks, behavioral tendencies, or other sensitive information not apparent today.

Second, genetic data doesn't just reveal information about the individual—it exposes relatives who never consented to data collection. It can identify family members, reveal paternity, and expose genetic conditions in relatives. This creates privacy issues and, in some cases violations, extending beyond the original customer to their entire family tree, including future generations.

And then, of course, there's the thing we don't want to be thinking about, but are being forced to because of how the Trump administration is using data to locate immigrants in the U.S. Genetic databases are increasingly being used by law enforcement through techniques like genetic genealogy. While this can solve crimes, it also means genetic data can be accessed by authorities in ways 23andMe customers probably never anticipated when they spit into a tube.

Thanks for reading.

-Ed

Otto Steinmayer's avatar

Good to hear this from you, dear Steve. You know your onions.

Hm. "Onion" because I recall a book on DNA which described how to extract onion DNA with a blender and ice-cold vodka.

7 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?