Skip to main content

Why I am Against Genetic Testing?

 Just because something is legal, doesn’t make it right.  Just because we enjoy a right of free speech, doesn’t mean we should be verbally insulting people. Just because the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves a treatment or a test, doesn’t mean we should pursue it.

The FDA has given approval to 23andMe, a private company, to provide genetic testing directly to individuals.  The results provide genetic risks of contracting several medical conditions including Parkinson’s disease and Alzheimer’s disease.  No prescription or physician visit is needed.  While 23andMe execs and marketers will undoubtedly claim that their mission is to empower the public, this does not tell the whole story.   Indeed, many patients who undergo the testing will be worse for having done so.  



I would never submit to the 23andMe home testing program myself, nor would I counsel my patients to do so.  It seems bizarre that the incredibly complex and nuanced medical issue of genetic risk would be available for direct consumer purchase.  We don’t permit patients to order a chest x-ray on themselves, but yet we will give them access to genetic testing results that many doctors like me won’t be able to skillfully interpret.  Make sense?

 “How much risk can there be if all you have do is to submit a saliva sample?” 

The risks come later once the results are in.  What is the value of discovering that you are at risk of developing a disease when there is no available treatment that can mitigate this risk?  If you learn that you have an increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease, would this knowledge improve your health?   Or would your life be filled with worry over a possible agonizing future.  Would you wonder when you misplace your keys if the beginning of the end is near?  If you knew now that Parkinson’s disease, an incurable and progressive neurologic disease, might be percolating within your brain, would your life be better?

Importantly, having an increased genetic risk does not mean that you will develop the condition.  You may very well live a long and happy life without ever developing the disease that you are at risk for. 
Of course, we should welcome genetic testing that can detect risks of conditions that we can prevent or influence, an entirely different issue from the one being discussed here.  Indeed, genetic testing has helped many of my patients and their families.

Will the public be able to resist the pitch from 23andMe and its competitors?  While physicians can educate our patients on the perils of these products, remember that patients are free to purchase them themselves.   It is likely that we physicians will be called upon only after the confusing and ominous results are in. 

Finally, the genetic risk industry’s true mission may be to sell genetic data to pharmaceutical companies and other institutions, a point not emphasized to the public. 





Comments

  1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Becoming a Part-Time Physician

Next month my schedule will change.  I will henceforth be off on Fridays with my work week truncated to Monday through Thursday.   I am excited to be enjoying a long weekend every weekend.  And while the schedule change is relatively minor, this event does feel like an important career moment for me.  It is the first step on a journey that will ultimately lead beyond my professional career.  It is this recognition that makes this modest schedule modification more significant than one would think it deserves.  As some readers know,   my current employed position has been a dream job for me.   Prior to this, I was in a small private practice, which I loved, but was much more challenging professionally and personally.   My partner and I ran the business.   Working nights, weekends and holidays were routine for decades.   On an on-call night, if I slept  through until morning, I felt as if I had won the lottery.   And w...

When Should Doctors Retire?

I am asked with some regularity whether I am aiming to retire in the near term.  Years ago, I never received such inquiries.  Why now?   Might it be because my coiffure and goatee – although finely-manicured – has long entered the gray area?  Could it be because many other even younger physicians have given up their stethoscopes for lives of leisure? (Hopefully, my inquiring patients are not suspecting me of professional performance lapses!) Interestingly, a nurse in my office recently approached me and asked me sotto voce that she heard I was retiring.    “Interesting,” I remarked.   Since I was unaware of this retirement news, I asked her when would be my last day at work.   I have no idea where this erroneous rumor originated from.   I requested that my nurse-friend contact her flawed intel source and set him or her straight.   Retirement might seem tempting to me as I have so many other interests.   Indeed, reading and ...

Will Smarter Lawyers End Frivolous Lawsuits?

How do you know if a lawyer is any good?  Of course, they've all passed the bar, but now their profession is lowering it.  While most of us strive for excellence, and raise our children to value this virtue, prominent legal educators are establishing a new quality intitiative for their profession.  Who says that lawyers can't reform themselves?  Perhaps, we physicians can follow their bold example and raise the credentials of our pre-medical students.  I’ll present the facts. You be the judge. I have written a dozen posts on tort reform on this blog, which always generate spirited and adversarial retorts from attorneys and their supporters. They accuse me and other tort reform advocates of carrying water for insurance companies. They repeatedly point out that I know nothing about the legal system and are unqualified to opine on its flaws. They deride me when I argue that effective tort reform would reduce the practice of defensive medicine, despite the re...