The headline is a bit misleading - GSK IS "Big Pharma". They've actually signed a deal with "Big DNA Research", I guess you would call it. I'm probably pretty obtuse, but I failed to see the danger described anywhere in the article. 23andMe plainly states in their disclaimers that the data can and will be used in research, so it's not like they are hiding anything. They further expound on precisely HOW that data will be used in the aforementioned research, and allow you to opt out of having your data used in the research projects without having to delete it - deleting the data deletes your account as well, and unless you've saved it page by page, everything you paid to know will be gone.
Could you be a little more specific as to what you consider "dangers" inherent in being included in the research? To be honest, the warning presented at 23andMe and AncestryDNA are quite a lot scarier than the vague "threats" presented in the article. For example, at both, you are warned that if insurance companies gain access to your data, they may be able to deny you insurance based on "pre-existent genetic conditions" - which is a non-starter for me, since I don't play the insurance lottery game anyhow.
You are also warned at some sites that Law Enforcement may gain access to your data via insidious, nefarious, and entirely unethical methods, and discover that you or a relative may be a long-lost and undetected rapist or something of that nature by comparing your results against their crime scene DNA. That's how they busted that California rapist from decades ago recently - he didn't have HIS DNA tested, but a relative did, and the rest is history. That can be pretty bad news if one is in the habit of leaving his or her DNA laying around at crime scenes.
There are also other dangers they warn you of, such as the mental anguish and shock of finding out your dad really ain't your dad if that turns out to be the case, and mom having a lot of 'splainin' to do... and, of course, the corollary of your unknown kids you've seeded the Earth with finding YOU.
Now, if any of those things are something one lays awake at night worrying about, then DNA testing might not be a good idea. But I seriously don't see the danger in my unidentified DNA being included in aggregate data for studies on drugs I will never use anyhow. Mine probably wouldn't interest them much, anyhow - I tested negative for ALL of the genetic anomalies that lead to disease. That by itself was sort of scary - there is a slight danger that I may live forever, which would get unimaginably boring, I would think.
On the other hand, by having myself, my ma, and as many siblings as possible tested, I am presented with a jigsaw puzzle of my dad's DNA, which was never collected. I expect it will take longer than my lifetime to work that puzzle, though. Each kid gets a different set of the parents' DNA, and by having one parent tested, you can isolate which DNA belongs to which parent, and put as much of the untested parent's DNA together as was carried into the next generation.
I found that I am 0.1% Nigerian, from an individual who is estimated to have been born between 1600 and 1700, which was something of a shock... but now I can always remind Grace that "once you go black, you never go back"!
I found that I have 4th cousins in the UK, Saudi Arabia, Jamaica, and Australia, which also freaked me out just a little - my entire lineage has been in the US since 1750, so how the hell does THAT happen? I got in touch with one of the UK individuals, and found that her pa was an American from my state, although the name was entirely unfamiliar. Still, problem solved. The cousin in Yorkshire is still a mystery, but I suspect something of the like to the one in Cornwall occurred. The one in Saudi Arabia is a blonde-haired, round-eyed all American beauty queen, married, apparently, to some sheikh. It's not hard to figure out what happened there. The Aussie is also a mystery, as their user name is utterly unpronounceable, so I haven't contacted them - folks obscure their names for a reason. The Jamaican, I suspect, came from the loins of that same long-ago Nigerian, but via a different route.
Makes me wonder if there are pirates that would fall out if I shook the family tree.
I found that I am more Neanderthal than about 3/4 of the US population. I found that my son really IS my son - despite what his mom tried to tell me in a fit of rage.
With that data, I can track my dad's dad's dad's etc lineage a LONG way back - thousands of years. Same for my mom's mom's moms' etc. lineage. With it, I know my sources - the populations that, in combination, produced the unique anomaly that is me. I've downloaded the data and can run it through my own tests, right here on this computer, that tells me things about myself that I never knew, and the DNA testing companies won't tell.
All of that is of more value, to me, than the off chance that a pharmaceutical company may use my DNA to develop a cure for the common cold - they probably should, since my DNA says I shouldn't ever catch anything.
So what are the dangers? If I found that @"BIAD" and I were related, would we have to wear matching dresses? I'm more of a granny dress kinda guy, since I don't have the legs for it any more.
.
Could you be a little more specific as to what you consider "dangers" inherent in being included in the research? To be honest, the warning presented at 23andMe and AncestryDNA are quite a lot scarier than the vague "threats" presented in the article. For example, at both, you are warned that if insurance companies gain access to your data, they may be able to deny you insurance based on "pre-existent genetic conditions" - which is a non-starter for me, since I don't play the insurance lottery game anyhow.
You are also warned at some sites that Law Enforcement may gain access to your data via insidious, nefarious, and entirely unethical methods, and discover that you or a relative may be a long-lost and undetected rapist or something of that nature by comparing your results against their crime scene DNA. That's how they busted that California rapist from decades ago recently - he didn't have HIS DNA tested, but a relative did, and the rest is history. That can be pretty bad news if one is in the habit of leaving his or her DNA laying around at crime scenes.
There are also other dangers they warn you of, such as the mental anguish and shock of finding out your dad really ain't your dad if that turns out to be the case, and mom having a lot of 'splainin' to do... and, of course, the corollary of your unknown kids you've seeded the Earth with finding YOU.
Now, if any of those things are something one lays awake at night worrying about, then DNA testing might not be a good idea. But I seriously don't see the danger in my unidentified DNA being included in aggregate data for studies on drugs I will never use anyhow. Mine probably wouldn't interest them much, anyhow - I tested negative for ALL of the genetic anomalies that lead to disease. That by itself was sort of scary - there is a slight danger that I may live forever, which would get unimaginably boring, I would think.
On the other hand, by having myself, my ma, and as many siblings as possible tested, I am presented with a jigsaw puzzle of my dad's DNA, which was never collected. I expect it will take longer than my lifetime to work that puzzle, though. Each kid gets a different set of the parents' DNA, and by having one parent tested, you can isolate which DNA belongs to which parent, and put as much of the untested parent's DNA together as was carried into the next generation.
I found that I am 0.1% Nigerian, from an individual who is estimated to have been born between 1600 and 1700, which was something of a shock... but now I can always remind Grace that "once you go black, you never go back"!
I found that I have 4th cousins in the UK, Saudi Arabia, Jamaica, and Australia, which also freaked me out just a little - my entire lineage has been in the US since 1750, so how the hell does THAT happen? I got in touch with one of the UK individuals, and found that her pa was an American from my state, although the name was entirely unfamiliar. Still, problem solved. The cousin in Yorkshire is still a mystery, but I suspect something of the like to the one in Cornwall occurred. The one in Saudi Arabia is a blonde-haired, round-eyed all American beauty queen, married, apparently, to some sheikh. It's not hard to figure out what happened there. The Aussie is also a mystery, as their user name is utterly unpronounceable, so I haven't contacted them - folks obscure their names for a reason. The Jamaican, I suspect, came from the loins of that same long-ago Nigerian, but via a different route.
Makes me wonder if there are pirates that would fall out if I shook the family tree.
I found that I am more Neanderthal than about 3/4 of the US population. I found that my son really IS my son - despite what his mom tried to tell me in a fit of rage.
With that data, I can track my dad's dad's dad's etc lineage a LONG way back - thousands of years. Same for my mom's mom's moms' etc. lineage. With it, I know my sources - the populations that, in combination, produced the unique anomaly that is me. I've downloaded the data and can run it through my own tests, right here on this computer, that tells me things about myself that I never knew, and the DNA testing companies won't tell.
All of that is of more value, to me, than the off chance that a pharmaceutical company may use my DNA to develop a cure for the common cold - they probably should, since my DNA says I shouldn't ever catch anything.
So what are the dangers? If I found that @"BIAD" and I were related, would we have to wear matching dresses? I'm more of a granny dress kinda guy, since I don't have the legs for it any more.
.
Diogenes was eating bread and lentils for supper. He was seen by the philosopher Aristippus, who lived comfortably by flattering the king.
Said Aristippus, ‘If you would learn to be subservient to the king you would not have to live on lentils.’ Said Diogenes, ‘Learn to live on lentils and you will not have to be subservient to the king.’
Said Aristippus, ‘If you would learn to be subservient to the king you would not have to live on lentils.’ Said Diogenes, ‘Learn to live on lentils and you will not have to be subservient to the king.’