On Charlie Rose last night they had the doctor in charge of the genome project. He says there are now at least 5 companies that will do a complete DNA marker for you. it cost about 1000 dollars and will tell you what diseases you are genetically predispositioned to have.
Do you want to know. ? The doc himself has refused because he does not want to know if he has Alzheimers in his future. To have a serious problem coming and know there is nothing that can be done would be scary. But so is ignorance. How do you vote?
Well, I don’t think a genetic marker is the same as certainty that you will develop a condition at a certain time. So many conditions have both genetic and environmental components - the earlier you knew you had a predisposition, the sooner you could begin preventative or ameliorative measures.
If you get the tests and discover that you have markers that predispose you to certain diseases, do you then have to disclose that on health questionnaires for jobs or insurance?
I think the big issue for me is the quality of life one. Knowing that you have a raised risk of developing a disease would probably adversely effect your QoL far more and for longer than the disease, if you even develop it. Alzheimer’s is a disease largely of old people, knowing when you’re 30 that you might develop it at some point after you turn 60 does you no good, only harm.
Unless the actual risk of developing the disease is high enough in, there is a family history or other risk factors AND there is something that can be done to prevent or treat the condition, I’m going to stay well clear of these tests.
One of the questions that came up is that if Alzheimers is in your future ,you would get a very good medical policy for your old age to unburden the family. But could insurance companies fight on the grounds of non disclosure. ? Is a potential future problem a medical condition? Insurance companies would fight it, that would be certain.
Could insurance companies demand the test.? Then refuse to insure on the basis of risk factors. It is a can of worms.
What!? You mean I’m going to get more inherited diseases than I already have? Sheesh, don’t tell me. *Never *tell me the odds. Seriously, it seems kind of pointless to me. As mentioned, a positive DNA test increases the danger of losing one’s insurance and leaves you living with increased fear. Yet, the DNA test can only express our current level of understanding about risk factors and how they influence whether one gets a disease. I wouldn’t do it, because I don’t think we can make accurate predictions yet. Even when we can make accurate predictions, it would be senseless if there aren’t any preventative steps one can take.
I believe the point of the DNA test is that it can accurately predict the future health. It is not a crap shoot but actually reads your own personal DNA markers and determines where they are deficient. Many diseases can be prevented or made easier to live with ,if you know. But Alzhiemers is the tricky one.
If the price was not so high, and if the test was guaranteed confidential, so that insurance companies could not get ahold of the results, I’d take it. If the test revealed a low chance that I would suffer from Alzheimer’s (which runs in my family), I’d quit smoking that very day.
I think you’re over-estimating what these tests are actually capable of.
A genetic marker for a disease does not mean that it’s certain that you will get that disease, it means that you are at a higher risk of that disease than someone without that marker.
The example is the BRCA1/2 genes for breast cancer. Someone who has a positive test for that has an elevated risk of developing breast cancer, but it is not a foregone conclusion. Before having the test the person would normally be given considerable counselling, not only to prepare them for the possibility of getting a positive result, but to instruct them on how to interpret the result correctly and act in a way that will benefit them. Routine testing for BRCA mutations is actually discouraged.
Somehow I doubt that the companies offering the tests are providing the counselling and advice.
Another thing that worries me is the possibility of false-positives. If there are false-positives then some people will opt to recieve some intervention for which there is no gain but could be serious downsides.
Huh? You have to answer health questions on job applications? WTF?
Maybe not, The guy on the show ran the Genome Project. I have to believe he knows something about it.
Some jobs require a physical. There’s a question about it in GQ right now.
Are you saying that there’s a test that will give me a 100% reliable answer to whether I will get Alzheimer’s Disease?
And which “genome project” did this guy run?
Moved from General Questions to In My Humble Opinion.
Gfactor
General Questions Moderator
Early onset Alzheimer’s is caused by gene mutations on chromosomes 1, 14, and 21. If you any of these mutations, you are nearly certain to get it (can’t find exact risk profile at this point). In addition, all offspring have a 50/50 chance of developing it if one of their parents had it. For regular AD, ther’s only one ID’d genetic risk factor, ApoE.
As to the OP, I would do it, I think. As others have said, most disease conditions are only risk factors, so you can take steps to minimize your risk as much as you can.
Insurance questions are a another kettle of fish, and one that I’m not fully sure how I feel at this point.
You can not have your entire genome sequenced for a $1000 right now. It costs a shitload more then that, and is not publicly available. There are very few people in the world who’ve had their genome sequenced to date.
All these scammers you mention do is look at certain parts of your genome and tell you if you are predisposed to certain diseases. The instruments they use, and the software they use to analyze the results is frequently not approved by the FDA to treat or diagnose any disease, they might as well be flipping a coin.
If you want legitimate results you will have to pick the diseases you want and then find a company that offers an FDA approved in-vitro diagnostic for it.
Using research use only tools and software is not a legitimate way to figure out if you might be at increased risk for any condition. Its like buying those diet or male enhancement pills they advertise late at night.
What’s the point? I can’t stop it, and I’ve already got kids. I already know what diseases my family’s suffered.
If it were accurate, I certainly would want to know. I want to know what to watch for.
Partially because I know nothing about my biological dad’s side of the family. I know his parents died when he was a kid, but that’s it.
This is one that has always puzzled me. What the hell am I supposed to do if I’m very predisposed? Chop 'em off now? No way.
My mother died of a rare, very fast spreading, genetic type of breast cancer. My two sisters and myself could have had testing for this cancer, but my doctor said not to do it, because an insurance company could choose not to cover this because it was a pre-existing condition (or possibility) in my recollection. The three of us discussed just having all the girls lopped off, but in the end decided not to. Two of us have regular mammograms. (The third may too, I don’t know – do they give mammograms in prison???)
I already know what my family has a predisposition to. High cholesterol, heart disease, but don’t go out of my way much to do anything about it. I don’t eat like a health nut, but I also don’t buy pre-made food and mcdonalds.
I do not trust insurance companies not to use the information against me. Even if it wouldn’t be allowed for them to do so now, they’d lobby someone in Washington and eventually get their way.