DNA Test for Finding Ancestors Raises Privacy Concerns

NBC Bay Area ^ | 4/30 | Christine Roher, Joe Rojas, and Chris Chmura

[Yaelle]

I feel it is good for the individual to know the risks of a genetic tendency. Epigenetics is real. My daughter had to be tested because she is of adopted genetics and there are some conditions for which she has genetic tendencies. One can be prevented with diet. She is 5. I told her the truth, that x condition could shorten her life when she is old like grandma, but not if she eats choline her whole life, and it is in eggs, so let’s eat one egg every morning. So she does.

And what about this one- I do not have an Alzheimer’s “gene” but both my parents had/have it. Environmental.

There is so much you can do. Only a very few things are death sentences. The younger you have the test, the more you can do as prevention.

(I will agree that opening the results up to relatives is not necessarily a good thing. However, remember that siblings only share HALF their genes ON AVERAGE. There is a wide variety of what might be shared, so even a sib doesn’t HAVE necessarily the same risk for a certain condition.)

[Yaelle]

Every time I see the TV ad for this, I think I should get the kit, and swab a dog’s mouth, send it in, and see what response I get.

---

They have it for dogs. Same price. People want to know their mutt is 25% Maltese, 15% German shepherd, 10% pointer, etc.

[Grampa Dave]

The next time you see your MD, ask him why he did a DNA test on you.

Please let me know what he told you.

Thanks,
Dave

[RetiredTexasVet]

“fake” + “alias” = huh?

[papertyger]

If that’s the case, why do ancestry and other companies like it require a DNA license to join? Money.

Bull$h!t.

They want to keep it because the more individuals they have in their database the easier it is to trace solid connections.

Why isn't the term "journalist" treated like the terms "feminist," "activist," and "conspiracy theorist?"