Stay Curious

SIGN UP FOR OUR WEEKLY NEWSLETTER AND UNLOCK ONE MORE ARTICLE FOR FREE.

Sign Up

VIEW OUR Privacy Policy


Discover Magazine Logo

WANT MORE? KEEP READING FOR AS LOW AS $1.99!

Subscribe

ALREADY A SUBSCRIBER?

FIND MY SUBSCRIPTION
Advertisement

Brave new world faces the licensing cartel

Explore the risks of home DNA tests and the shortage of qualified genetic counsellors in the medical field.

Newsletter

Sign up for our email newsletter for the latest science news

Sign Up

Dan MacArthur has a very good post, New York Times adopts medical establishment line on personal genomics:

The NY Times has an article entitled "Buyer beware of home DNA tests" that adopts the paternalistic party line of the medical establishment: taking DNA tests without a doctor's advice is hazardous to your health. Remarkably, the article acknowledges that qualified genetic counsellors are few and far between and that "most practicing physicians lack the knowledge and training in genetics to interpret [DNA tests] properly", and yet still suggests that customers should "take the findings to a qualified expert". Begging the question: which qualified expert should customers be taking their test results to?

The over-worked genetic counsellor who has enough on their plate dealing with serious genetic conditions without having to worry about a patient with a type 2 diabetes relative risk of 1.17?

Or the general practitioner who understands less about modern ...

Stay Curious

JoinOur List

Sign up for our weekly science updates

View our Privacy Policy

SubscribeTo The Magazine

Save up to 40% off the cover price when you subscribe to Discover magazine.

Subscribe
Advertisement

0 Free Articles