My thoughts on getting my own DNA tested:
Displaying poll results.16452 total votes.
Most Votes
- By the end of 2026, how useful do you think agentic/multi-agent AI systems will actually be in your daily work or personal projects? Posted on March 11th, 2026 | 1695 votes
Most Comments
- By the end of 2026, how useful do you think agentic/multi-agent AI systems will actually be in your daily work or personal projects? Posted on March 11th, 2026 | 22 comments
Why would I? (Score:5, Insightful)
Call me ignorant, but I see no reason to undergo a DNA evaluation in the near future.
Re:Why would I? (Score:5, Informative)
Call me ignorant, but I see no reason to undergo a DNA evaluation in the near future.
Yeah, I suppose I can think of a few edge cases where there might be value in this; but for most people this is an expensive solution looking for a problem to solve.
Re:Why would I? (Score:5, Interesting)
I selected mildly interested. The reason is that my wife and I are starting to think about having kids. The problem is that we are both anonymously adopted, meaning we have no idea what our family histories are and therefore what the risk to our kids are. Both of us also know many people who have genetic diseases. Two examples, Friend A has an X linked trait, meaning that every one of his daughters would be carriers and Friend B has a huge family history of SSA. With my wife and I, we could have genes necessary to genetically dooming our children due to the way we combine genetically.
BUT, there are too many questions about privacy and cost.
All together, mildly interested.
Re:Why would I? (Score:5, Interesting)
I selected mildly interested. The reason is that my wife and I are starting to think about having kids. The problem is that we are both anonymously adopted, meaning we have no idea what our family histories are and therefore what the risk to our kids are. Both of us also know many people who have genetic diseases.
Screw that... if it was me i'd be more interested in making sure I hadn't married my cousin or sister :)
Seriously though, what will you do if you find out that your potential offspring have a high chance of inheriting something nasty? I guess your options are to not have kids, pre-screen via IVF, or pre-screen in utero and abort anything carrying the disease...
Re:Why would I? (Score:5, Insightful)
Or, obviously: adopt one! I'm sure there are lots of children that could benefit greatly from being adopted by a pair of parents wanting a child.
Re:Why would I? (Score:5, Insightful)
Also, who would better understand the specific problems of adopted children than people who were adopted themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
It could be a family tradition!
Re:Why would I? (Score:5, Insightful)
Interestingly enough, I have married friends who were both adopted and tried to have kids the old-fashioned way but couldn't. Their adopted twin boys just turned 5.
Leia? (Score:3)
If your name is Luke and hers is Leia, do you really want to know?
Re: (Score:2)
That's actually, oddly, rather unlikely. The MHC [wikipedia.org] tends to keep siblings from getting involved with each other.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Basic testing is cheap, $200 (Score:5, Interesting)
At 23andMe, it's under $200, occasionally $99 on sale. Gets you a lot of information, and updates as they find new things. Of course I did it under a pseudonym, and used a Hushmail account to get the results, because I'd rather not risk linking my genetic information to the real world, so I'm also not responding to the "We might be related" emails that their ancestry section supports. But the medical information is interesting, and the ancestry information is consistent with what I'd expect. I have answered a number of their research questionnaire things (e.g. family history of cancer, heart disease, diabetes, etc.) which they use to try to find out more correlations between genes and medical conditions.
Most of the results are of the form "you're X% likely to get this disease/symptom, compared to Y% of European males of your age group", or "you do/don't have the gene for this condition", depending on whether it's a condition that's strictly determined by a gene (like hemophilia), or influenced by lots of different genes (like height or heart disease), or by genes and environment (like height or heart disease.)
Re: (Score:3)
My advice would be to ask each potential clinic what they test for and then try to match the particular tests with any high-ri
Gene screening nowhere near useful for consumers (Score:5, Informative)
First, and most important, the science on anything involving multigene inheritance (which is practically everything, including Type II diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancer susceptibility, etc., etc., etc.) is far from worked out. You'll get results, but even the scientists don't know what they mean yet.
Second, you need a lot of training to be able to interpret those results even to the extent that's valid under current knowledge. The gene screening outfits are not employing excellent genetic counselors to interpret the results. They have software (perhaps supplemented by drones) who match Dot A with Genetic Disorders Database B.
It's not GIGO, because your genetic input is not the garbage. But what comes out definitely is.
Re: (Score:2)
Second, you need a lot of training to be able to interpret those results even to the extent that's valid under current knowledge. The gene screening outfits are not employing excellent genetic counselors to interpret the results. They have software (perhaps supplemented by drones) who match Dot A with Genetic Disorders Database B.
You need a lot of specialized training to create the model; you don't need training beyond basic probability/statistics to interpret the results. Once the genetic data is supplemented with relevant patient/family history, software can be as good as the counselor at the conditional probability/risk assessement end of genetic counseling, and probably better than human counselors as more complex patterns are recognized. The counselor isn't so much about interpreting the results, i.e., going from alleles to "yo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It's $300 from 23andMe at the moment. Not that expensive for what you get - especially if you're of an inquisitive nature.
To my surprise I found I was carrying the delta-F508 mutation - this is found in about 1 in 25 white people, and if you have two copies of the mutation you get cystic fibrosis. If you know anyone with cystic fibrosis you'll know it's a horrible disease.
If I plan to have children, I can test my partner to ensure she does not carry this also. I've also tested my sisters - fortunately they
Re: (Score:2)
Call me ignorant, but I see no reason to undergo a DNA evaluation in the near future.
If said evaluation can determine your risks for certain cancers, then you can be tested more regularly for those cancers in order to catch them sooner and have a higher chance of survival, and to take any preventative measures.
Of course, the big big negative is that it could be used by insurance companies in the future as an excuse to deny coverage, making said treatment unavailable. Even if there are laws on the books at the time of testing preventing insurance companies from doing that, you never know wh
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
You may well be unaware of the usefulness, but it is truly already useful.
I've gotten tested through 23andMe, and the report includes a "Drug Response" section that helped inform my Dr. on what (not) to prescribe.
Re: (Score:2)
Assuming this is reliable, *that* is where I think the promise is.
And that's why I'm at least mildly interested. If I were confident that the predictions of drug compatibility were both comprehensive and reliable, I'd upgrade that to very interested. The only limiting factor at that time will be "affordable," and that's coming.
Re: (Score:2)
The only reason I think of is knowing myself. It's for informational purposes, nothing else.
Link it to your Google+ and Facebook account! (Score:2)
"Call me ignorant, but I see no reason to undergo a DNA evaluation in the near future."
Link it to your Google+ and Facebook account and have it publicly available.
Then your potential girlfriends, the police, and your insurance companies can see who you really are!
Less fuss, since you have nothing to hide. Very, very convenient.
Re: (Score:2)
Call me ignorant, but I see no reason to undergo a DNA evaluation in the near future.
Same here. By now I've got a pretty good idea, by looking at parents, grand parents and siblings. Plus, I've had my own spells of discovery with a tumor and blood sugar. Live life a day at a time. Enjoy yourself.
plus I'm utterly terrified of the prospect I'd be linked genetically to cowboy neal
Re: (Score:2)
Call me ignorant, but I see no reason to undergo a DNA evaluation in the near future.
It's called curiosity. It's called being interested in science. It's called enjoying technology, and liking being part of it.
But I guess this is Spiffpuff - News is boring, nothing matters.
Re: (Score:2)
Call me ignorant, but I see no reason to undergo a DNA evaluation in the near future.
IGNORANT ! My work is done here.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And until I can be sure that data is safe... I'd rather it just stay right where it is...
I'd be strongly interested, but only under the condition that only I know about the data. Considering it's genetic data, unless I can test it myself, that's not going to happen in the near term, unless they offer blind tests on individual chromosomes that only you will have the ability to assemble into a whole.
Re:Why would I? (Score:4, Informative)
Because if they know a few SNPs they own your soul?!
I'm always astounded at how ludditish* people on this site with regards to genetic testing. What black magic do they think they can cast on you if they know you're AG at rs13060385?
*Yes, I know Luddite means something different to the commonly accepted meaning, and I'm not interested in the correct definition, but I do like calling people luddites.
Here's a selection of my raw data:
rs4477212 1 72017 AA
rs3094315 1 742429 AG
rs3131972 1 742584 AG
rs12124819 1 766409 AA
rs11240777 1 788822 AA
rs6681049 1 789870 CC
rs4970383 1 828418 CC
rs4475691 1 836671 CC
rs7537756 1 844113 AA
rs13302982 1 851671 GG
rs1110052 1 863421 GT
Do your worst.
Re:Why would I? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Why would I? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
What about a public company?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Why would I? (Score:5, Funny)
PROTIP: Soon there will be gene therapy. Meaning, you can fix genetic defects. Which is seriously awesome.
Yes, and by going through the motions you will make the cargo come. Real soon now.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, and by going through the motions you will make the cargo come. Real soon now.
Maybe that would be a good marketing tactic by the genetic testing companies. Promise to donate x% of their profits to research into fixing genetic defects. You're right that, absent that, you're essentially engaging in cargo cult thinking by getting this testing done because someday there'll be gene therapy, but it would be a connection many people would be prone to making, and cashing in/helping them in that way might be a way to distinguish yourself.
Re: (Score:3)
Clarification needed (Score:5, Interesting)
What do you mean by getting DNA tested? Am I interested in having my complete genome sequenced? No. But I have gotten blood drawn that was screened for certain specific recessive genetic diseases :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_genetic_diseases#Genetic_testing_in_Jewish_populations
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe Jews should stop inbreeding so much and you wouldn't have those diseases...
And maybe if they weren't treated so poorly by people they would become a less insular culture that more frequently brought in outsiders or married out. Though, in some parts of the world that isn't such a huge problem, and indeed my predicted result is exactly what happens.
Re: (Score:2)
Been there, done that (Score:2)
Never mind...
The Best Thing About The Future (Score:4, Insightful)
The best thing about the future is that it is unknown.
I'll pass on the DNA tests ...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The best thing about my computer is that it is a box that does stuff I want to do. The best thing about computer programs is that they are icons I click on to run and somehow they let me go on the internet, play movies, and even games.
I can't imagine why anyone would actually want to know what those wires, cables and cards do, and what all those scary symbols mean. I'll pass on that...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd consider this an argument for getting a DNA test.
As I understand it, many things can be treated significantly better if they are caught early. It may be too late for me, but if I were to have children...
As I see it, that's a good reason not to get tested. If you know about flaws in your genetic makeup and you then willingly pass it on, you must be a (no pun intended) bastard.
As for treatment, not everyone thinks that life is sacred and that everything that can be treated should be treated. If you breed animals, you don't normally treat genetic defects by other than euthanasia and/or sterilization to weed out the bad genetics. Some believe that we are animals, and that death isn't intrinsically bad, but
Re: (Score:2)
As I see it, that's a good reason not to get tested. If you know about flaws in your genetic makeup and you then willingly pass it on, you must be a (no pun intended) bastard.
I don't understand that argument. If you believe that (and I most certainly don't. Genetic perfection is not a requirement for having children, and it's a scary world when we start believing otherwise), then you're a bastard for not getting tested. There is a way for you to find out about these flaws you think are so awful, and you're deliberately avoiding finding out about it. The obligatory car analogy is drinking, then deciding not to use your portable breathalyzer before driving home because if you
Re: (Score:2)
If you know about flaws in your genetic makeup and you then willingly pass it on, you must be a (no pun intended) bastard.
Your argument assumes that anyone born with a genetic disease would rather not have been born.
That simply isn't true so why would the parent be a bastard (and it wouldn't have been a pun even if you had intended it).
Re: (Score:2)
Your argument assumes that anyone born with a genetic disease would rather not have been born.
No, it doesn't. It assumes that someone with a genetic disease would rather not have been born with it. Which I can assure you is true.
That simply isn't true so why would the parent be a bastard
The prospective parent can't know what the child will think beforehand. When they know the child is going to be defective, and that some children resent being defective, yes, they are bastards. Adopt a healthy child instead.
Re: (Score:2)
Show me a study that says that people born with a genetic disease would rather not have ever existed and I'll admit I'm wrong. You won't find one though so you are wrong.
A child may resent being 'defective' as you put it, but eveyone is imperfect and everyone resents something. Y
Re: (Score:2)
Show me a study that says that people born with a genetic disease would rather not have ever existed and I'll admit I'm wrong. You won't find one though so you are wrong.
A child may resent being 'defective' as you put it, but eveyone is imperfect and everyone resents something. Your thinking is immature and incredibly crude. It is in fact worth invoking Godwin and suggseting that this point of view is exactly what the Nazis had in mind.
Mister, I have a genetic condition, and I wish I had never been born. Now that I am born, I don't wish to die, but I still wish I had never been born, and have wished that for two generations now. Again, not being born is different from dead. I truly wish I had never been born, and I think you owe me an apology.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, some people would prefer to have a child who also shares their deafness:
Something is wrong with this world if this is seriously considered acceptable out of consideration for the disabled, while plugging the ears of a healthy child would be considered abuse...
Re: (Score:2)
Being alive is a condition that we've been able to remedy quite easily for a long time.
Being dead, less so.
Being dead != not born
You don't deprive anyone of a life by not giving them life, because there is no "them" afore you give them life.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
As for treatment, not everyone thinks that life is sacred and that everything that can be treated should be treated. If you breed animals, you don't normally treat genetic defects by other than euthanasia and/or sterilization to weed out the bad genetics.
My wife has an autosomal dominant connective tissue disorder. We had kids knowing that she had an autosomal dominant connective tissue disorder. Why shouldn't we? She is quite glad to have been born, and she has taken her diagnosis and used it to raise awareness of the condition and to help advocate for people who are suffering (including those with similar-but-unrelated conditions). She is also a great many things outside of her diagnosis, too. So we had kids, and we will make sure that they have the
Re: (Score:2)
There are probably flaws in your genetic makeup that you know of anyway.
Are you 100% fit, incredibly smart, tall, good looking, got nice flawless skin?
Or are you short-sighted, got a beer gut, get constipated easily? Do you find it difficult to interact with people? Have you had hernias, or asthma, or a history of cardiac disease?
We all have flaws, and we all have "genetic flaws". We permit very imperfect people to have kids all the time!
No Thanks To Discrimination (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would I want to get my DNA tested? At best it tells me I am healthy and I wasted my time. At worst it tells me ( and everyone else in this age of Big Brother ) that I have a genetic predisposition, now on record, so health insurance companies can discriminate against me.
Re: (Score:2)
Why would I want to get my DNA tested? At best it tells me I am healthy and I wasted my time. At worst it tells me ( and everyone else in this age of Big Brother ) that I have a genetic predisposition, now on record, so health insurance companies can discriminate against me.
In the United States (and also in englightened countries) using that sort of information against you is illegal. Yes, if your country doesn't ban the practice, your country is unenlightened -- even more so than the USA and that's saying a lot.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
using that sort of information against you is illegal
SO FAR.....
Re: (Score:2)
It won't be used against, but it might be used for you. At least that's how it will be phrased.
For example, when you apply for life insurance, they will ask if you have ever had a DNA test. The answers are:
A) Yes and here's my results!
B) Yes, but you can't see my results.
C) No.
The results will not be used against you, but good results might get you a better rate.
Re: (Score:2)
The results will not be used against you, but good results might get you a better rate.
You, sir, do not understand economics. If it were legal to discriminate positively (lower your rates) if you have a "good" DNA test, this will drive up the rates for those who don't or opt out. The insurance companies will have do this if they want to retain their existing revenues and profits.
Re: (Score:2)
I understand it perfectly well, and I agree with your prediction.
It isn't unlike Progressive's Snapshot which monitors your driving and gives you a discount if you fit a lower risk profile. The problem for the insurance company is that they can't discriminate based on a genetic test, so instead the raise their prices but give discounts for low risk customers.
Re: (Score:2)
No, at best it tells you about a condition that can be more easily treated if spotted in advance. You're unfairly refusing to acknowledge possible advantages.
Only interested if it helps me. (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
At least you would know that eventually your mind is going to go. At worst you can now value your time and plan accordingly (much as if you were going to live to by 100) so that this doesn't catch you off guard. At best you can start looking into early treatment or even start to fund some so that when it comes time, there might be something that can be done. Hell, at least you can choose what you want to do about it. If you slowly slip into senility, it could be up to your family to
Like checking a lottery ticket (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
hayfever's a bitch though, right?
Done that (several times) (Score:5, Interesting)
For anyone interested, http://23andme.com/ [23andme.com] provides a cheap and easy way to do DNA testing on yourself - you buy their kit, make a saliva sample and mail it to them. And it can be fully anonymous.
Re: (Score:2)
Why several times? I didn't think your DNA can change with time.
Re: (Score:2)
Possibly due to the tech constantly improving? A DNA test 10 years ago verse today verse 10 years from now could show very different things.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, complete sequencing is not che
Maury Povich, is that you? (Score:2)
And why are there four women with babies sitting on stage?
The jeans .... (Score:2)
Gattaca (Score:2)
Gattaca. There, someone has brought it up, you can all move on now.
Re: (Score:2)
Gattaca. There, someone has brought it up, you can all move on now.
Yes, that documentary was interesting. Thanks God those times are behind us (and we can move on now).
Where (Score:2)
Someone probably beat me to this one....
Only with full sequencing (Score:3)
I will when I can get a CD or DVD sent out with the entire genome sequenced, preferrably including "junk DNA". Anyone know if that's typically included in gene sequencing?
If I have the entire sequence I can run software to do new DNA tests in software on demand.
I'm wary of the idea. (Score:2)
Sure, having some foresight into what you may face as you age is helpful, for one may take some preventative measures to help stave off or decrease a risk of inherent issues from beginning.
Conversely, there really is no privacy in this. When one orders a kit, it is shipped to a mailing address, likely your own. Next the results, I suspect may show whether the DNA belonged to a male or female. Then if specific traits exist they could be correlated to statistical data for your area. And if your mailing ad
Re: (Score:2)
Conversely, there really is no privacy in this. When one orders a kit, it is shipped to a mailing address, likely your own. Next the results, I suspect may show whether the DNA belonged to a male or female. Then if specific traits exist they could be correlated to statistical data for your area. And if your mailing address includes your zip+4, there is a possibility that you may be identified. All of this little data may be easily cross referenced against databases like www.intelius.com/ to find out who lives at said address. If there is only one person, and they are still the resident, then that data may easily be correlated back to you no matter what bullshit name you provide. And if your SSN is used, forget it, you're definitely not anonymous, it's just an illusion of privacy.
So what?
Oh no, they know where I live!! Them! The elusive "they" who gets everyone riled up on Slashdot.
The thing about other people's DNA, is that it is quite boring. Even more boring than the content of other person's emails, or their Facebook account.
Newsflash, the bank knows where I live and they have access to nearly all my money! Yet I'm not panicking!
Genetic family tree (Score:3)
I think it would be fascinating to build a genetic family tree. Sequence all the living relatives, then determine as far back as possible where each of my chromosomes came from. I can get some idea from deceased ancestors based on shared genes from cousins. I wouldn't go so far as to exhume my great-great grandparents or anything like that.
Obviously, it's easy to track back the Y chromosome (excluding any family secrets) and the mitochondria DNA, but that leaves 45 other bits of DNA to track back.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Much more than 45 pieces. Sure, you get one of a pair of chromosomes from mum, and one from dad. But during meisosis, each parent's chromosome crosses over in multiple locations. This means that you don't necessarily get 25% from each grandparent. (Although it will average out at 25%).
So the autosomal chromosomes are being shuffled like two decks of cards as they go down the generations. But I agree with the spirit of what you're saying, you can still try and trace what part of each chromosome came from you
Insurance Companies (Score:3)
Even assuming these tests provided useful information on a wide spectrum of genetic disorders (they don't), I don't trust my current or future health insurers enough to have this information known.
They would gladly leave me in the street to die if I discover that I will develop a health condition one day.
Only on 1 condition (Score:2)
Don't want my DNA on file anywhere (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The world isn't fucked. And I don't think too many people care what you believe.
Re: (Score:3)
They'll keep it and clone you. The world needs more paranoid nerds.
Only useful test would be APOE alleles (Score:2)
Given that most current theory has adaptive biochemical pathways using the secondary and the evolutionarily primitive tertiary pathways when knocked out by siRNA or drug interactions, testing your DNA is mostly useless.
Except perhaps for the Apolipoprotien-E alleles - if you have 2 ApoE 4 alleles that would mean you have a high risk of Alzheimer's so you might wish to overeducate yourself to preserve capability as long as possible, and try to reduce Cardiovascular risks that make it worse.
Beyond that, your
My genome online (Score:2)
This count as been there done that?: https://github.com/sbassi/MiGenomaSbassi [github.com]
what is DNA anyways?? (Score:2)
Probably stands for Did Not Attack!
(Dana Carvey mocking Johnny Cochrain during the OJ trial)
WIsh to License it to highest bidder (Score:2)
With a whopping yearly update fee and DRM requiring login to a server whilst accessing the data.
Not sure about future (Score:2)
23andMe (Score:2)
This is just a bit of information so people know what places like 23andMe test. I'm definitely no expert, but I had no understanding of this before I'd tested, and thought I try to write something about it.
As everyone here knows, nearly every cell in our body contains our DNA. It is contained in 23 pairs of chromosomes, and made of As, Ts, Cs and Gs. 23andMe doesn't give you the full sequence.
What it does is test about 900,000 sites on the DNA. These sites are generally chosen because they vary amongst peop
Re: (Score:2)
Do you mean the letters A, C, G and T?
Re: (Score:3)
no, his parents were found to be RNA viruses, he got ACG and U instead.
Re:Missing Option: (Score:5, Funny)
Does not concern me.
As in "I do not have DNA, you insensitive clod"?
Otherwise, the option you are missing is right there.
Re: (Score:2)
"What about DNA preservation, so your own genome might be repaired in 30 years?"
I put my last keyboard in cryo storage. It should yield at least a pint of recoverable DNA....