Slashdot Mirror

Doesn't look like it's published yet, but here is the paper. https://permalinks.23andme.com/pdf/23_19-Type2Diabetes_March2019.pdf.

Furthermore you agree not to use the Services to: (1) [...]; (2) impersonate any person or entity, including, but not limited to, anyone affiliated with 23andMe, or falsely state or otherwise misrepresent your affiliation with a person or entity;

I suspect if a reporter did submit samples under different names, a court would side with the press against their terms of service. Eventually.

But by using identical twins, you sidesteps the possibility of wasting time, effort, and money because your report has been tied up by a gag order while a court mulls over what to do.

Under certain circumstances Personal Information may be subject to disclosure pursuant to judicial or other government subpoenas, warrants, or orders, or in coordination with regulatory authorities. However, we use all practical legal and administrative resources to resist such requests. In the event we are required by law to make a disclosure, we will notify you in advance, unless doing so would violate the law or a court order.

https://www.23andme.com/transp...

For 23andMe you can read their transparency report

https://www.23andme.com/transp...

"Under certain circumstances Personal Information may be subject to disclosure pursuant to judicial or other government subpoenas, warrants, or orders, or in coordination with regulatory authorities. However, we use all practical legal and administrative resources to resist such requests. In the event we are required by law to make a disclosure, we will notify you in advance, unless doing so would violate the law or a court order."

I'm pretty sure it's from 23andMe. That is, some BS statistic for people with more money than sense.

You're a god-damned liar. They state right on their home page that nothing they provide should be used to treat any disease.

https://www.23andme.com/

The 23andMe PGS test uses qualitative genotyping to detect clinically relevant variants in the genomic DNA of adults from saliva collected using an FDA-cleared collection device (OrageneDX model OGD-500.001) for the purpose of reporting and interpreting genetic health risks and reporting carrier status. It is not intended to diagnose any disease. The relevance of each report varies based on ethnicity. Each genetic health risk report describes if a person has variants associated with a higher risk of developing a disease, but does not describe a person's overall risk of developing the disease. These reports are not intended to tell you anything about your current state of health, or to be used to make medical decisions, including whether or not you should take a medication or how much of a medication you should take. Our carrier status reports can be used to determine carrier status, but cannot determine if you have two copies of any genetic variant. These carrier reports are not intended to tell you anything about your risk for developing a disease in the future or anything about the health of your fetus, or your newborn child's risk of developing a particular disease later in life. For Gaucher Disease Type 1, we provide a single report that includes information on both carrier status and genetic health risk. The Parkinson's Disease genetic health risk report (i) is indicated for reporting of the G2019S variant in the LRRK2 gene, and the N370S variant in the GBA gene, (ii) describes if a person has variants associated with an increased risk of developing Parkinson's disease, and (iii) is most relevant for people of European, Ashkenazi Jewish, and North African Berber descent.

So....fuck you for supporting rent-seeking policies that try to stop people getting medical care without the blessing(and billing) of various self-selected groups.

So I figured it wouldn't be a big deal to pay http://www.23andme.com/ $99 to tell me a little bit about my genetic profile that the government already knows.

I think the author, using the "offensive-computing" nick, knew very well that this would trigger a discussion and that's probably the reason this project was created in the first place.

Yes, mod this up as the most insightful contribution to the thread so far. Although the author is careful to use other example in the readme, the code and example application are (provocatively) written to discriminate against everyone except the usual racist definition of 'white Europeans'. The 'European' group of reference populations defined by 23andme would normally include Ashkenazi Jews:

https://customercare.23andme.c...

but this group is explicitly excluded by offensive-computing:

https://github.com/offapi/rbac...

I can't think of any practical use for such a Genetic Access Control method nor of a reason to feel outrage and clamor "racism". For a start, this app only works for users who are also 23andme clients anyway, who also agree to have the app access their data (à la Twitter), and I'd say those people pretty much already explicitly waived their genetic privacy.

Also, I can attest to how widely inaccurate some of the results you get through the API can be, especially the ethnic origin results. In my case it's ~16% inaccurate. It's known to overstate european origins and downplay or entirely lack quite a few less common origins, as the comparison database misses data from entire ethnical groups (Sinté, Romani...) or has only a handful (or single) individual DNAs for many potential origins (Romania, Azerbaijan, etc.). And the haplogroups tree that the API reports from is outdated (and, again as in my case, very lacking of resolution in several branches).

We're surrounded by tiny errors in the world. Heck, they're even built into our DNA.

Speak for yourself! I just got my 23andMe report and it says there are no errors, therefore I'm special!

With the shuttering of 23andme.com, forced by the FDA, we no longer have the ability to have our genes sequenced on our own prerogative.

Thanks federal government.

Actually, you can get all that data and it is still ONLY $99.

https://www.23andme.com/

What the gubblemint did was prevent the sharing of their OPINION on that data. So instead of commentary from a relatively neutral party, there are oodles of services popping up to interpret that data for you! Since that is automatable task, the cost can trend to zero, and it may just become a marketing opportunity buried in the fine print. At least with 23andme.org, I knew they wanted my $99. Now, they still get that but someone else may have to get my data (when I want it re-analyzed, not much point now since it was done pre-free-speech ban in 2013).

I guess there are open source opportunitites to run the analysis at home too. But I far preferred having a single organization with the freedom to do both.

Yes, they should be working at higher standards. You only have to look at their "research" pages: https://www.23andme.com/about/factoids/ and click any of the links. Some are worse than others but all are shit. Click the Parkinson's & cholesterol, for instance. Vague statements and an irrelevant graph. That's the trend throughout those links. It's basically no better than astrology. The markers they test for (which is what the FDA is worried about) is a separate issue, and are more likely to be meaningful, but the fact that their "research" page is the way it is puts me off having their test. They need to explain their false positive and negative rates and say what it is for each test (e.g. penicillin sensitivity). They also need to be clearer on what a positive for particular marker means. e.g. WTF does "Slightly higher odds of developing basal cell carcinoma" actually mean? If you re-read the page more carefully you notice that it's 1.3 times greater odds. But 1.3 times greater than what? One of the basic rules of data analysis is that if you don't know what a proportional change means in absolute terms then you know nothing. i.e. it's bollocks. Yes, I could click on the original publication, but most people don't have the scientific background to understand it. Furthermore, if there are few studies linking gene X with condition Y then you're not even sure how true or how widely applicable the results are. e.g. if the studies were done on white people from Europe then are the results true for a black person from Africa? We don't know and 23andMe don't tell use this is a caveat (which it is).

I'm an early adopter. I have used 23andMe's services and have found them enlightening, useful and thus far, accurate, in-line with other established tests that I have taken.
For those who haven't used their services before, I would recommend taking a look at the language used in their reports before being overly critical: https://www.23andme.com/health/Warfarin-Coumadin-Sensitivity/ , https://www.23andme.com/health/Breast-Cancer/
I am a reasonably rational person. I stepped into this as an early adopter, knowing that there is an unknown degree of Type I and Type II error. It has provided me with interesting results, and I have found the language used is quite clear that they are not providing a specific diagnosis or recommendation, beyond "think about" or "consider further testing on".
I am not saying that I assume most people would approach this information in the same way. I am not saying that 23andMe should be absolved of their responsibilities to due diligence and complying to regulation.
I am just saying that they do provide a very useful service that I believe will transform how we deal with prevention and wellness. As an early adopter, I hope that they (23andMe and the FDA) are able to find a balance between making this service widely available (in doing so, vastly increasing sample sizes and enabling new findings), at the same time as ensuring that people's responses to and expectations of the data provided (based on marketing claims) are sound.

I'm an early adopter. I have used 23andMe's services and have found them enlightening, useful and thus far, accurate, in-line with other established tests that I have taken.
For those who haven't used their services before, I would recommend taking a look at the language used in their reports before being overly critical: https://www.23andme.com/health/Warfarin-Coumadin-Sensitivity/ , https://www.23andme.com/health/Breast-Cancer/
I am a reasonably rational person. I stepped into this as an early adopter, knowing that there is an unknown degree of Type I and Type II error. It has provided me with interesting results, and I have found the language used is quite clear that they are not providing a specific diagnosis or recommendation, beyond "think about" or "consider further testing on".
I am not saying that I assume most people would approach this information in the same way. I am not saying that 23andMe should be absolved of their responsibilities to due diligence and complying to regulation.
I am just saying that they do provide a very useful service that I believe will transform how we deal with prevention and wellness. As an early adopter, I hope that they (23andMe and the FDA) are able to find a balance between making this service widely available (in doing so, vastly increasing sample sizes and enabling new findings), at the same time as ensuring that people's responses to and expectations of the data provided (based on marketing claims) are sound.

The problem is that 23andMe started making medical claims. As the FDA says, "your company's website at www.23andme.com/health ... markets the PGS for providing "health reports on 254 diseases and conditions," including categories such as "carrier status," "health risks," and "drug response," and specifically as a "first step in prevention" that enables users to "take steps toward mitigating serious diseases" such as diabetes, coronary heart disease, and breast cancer." Those are health claims. Those have to be clinically tested.

The history of their web site shows the health claims becoming more blatant over time.

• From 2008: "Find out what current research can tell you about your genes."
• From 2013: "Living well starts with knowing your DNA. Our genes make us who we are, so naturally they impact our health. By knowing your DNA, you can take steps toward living a healthier life. Find out if your children are at risk for inherited conditions, so you can plan for the health of your family. Order now."

Their advertising thus shows a progression from marketing to the technically curious to marketing to parents worried about their kids. That's what properly concerns the FDA.

It depends on your genes. There are different caffeine metabolization genes depending on which you have caffeine may be significantly worse for you. https://www.23andme.com/health/Caffeine-Metabolism/

https://www.23andme.com/health/Avoidance-of-Errors/ .. had the dna thing done for ancestry and noticed this was only $10 more. Checked the box before really thinking about how the results might be viewed by teachers, future employers, myself...

23andme.com will genotype 1,000,000 markers (SNPs) for $99 + a year of subscription at $9/month. So you get the ACTN3 allele (variation) plus many other genes ... for over 200 disease risks and traits: https://www.23andme.com/health/all/

Shameless (and copyvio) copy/paste from 23andMe:

This gene produces a protein called alpha-actinin-3 that is only turned on in fast-twitch muscle fibers (the kind used for power events like sprinting or weightlifting). The protein forms part of the contractile machinery in muscle cells, where it is thought to play both structural and signalling roles.

The T version of the SNP in this gene prevents the full protein from being made. People with two copies of the T version thus have a total lack of alpha-actinin-3 in their fast-twitch muscle fibers. Those with the CT genotype have one functional copy of the gene and can still make the protein.

Surprisingly, a complete lack of the alpha-actinin-3 protein doesn't seem to cause any type of disease. This is probably because another closely related protein can step in for alpha-actinin-3 in people without a functional copy. The substitute protein likely does not perform its job as well as alpha-actinin-3, resulting in worse performance in power exercises.

Despite lack of a disease outcome, researchers wondered if the absence of alpha-actinin-3 might have an effect on athletic performance. Studies of elite athletes in Australia and Finland showed that power athletes—those whose performance depends on fast-twitch muscle fibers—were much more likely to have at least one working copy of the gene than non-athletes. In one study of Olympic power athletes (i.e., the best of the best), all had at least one working copy. Similar results were found in a study of Spanish professional soccer players.

But does alpha-actinin-3 make a difference for non-athletes? In fact, it does.

One study looked at a group of Greek teenagers who had been tested for a variety of fitness measures related to power and endurance sports. In this group, ACTN3 genotype had no effect on the girls, but boys with the TT genotype were significantly slower in a 40 m sprint. Interestingly, running was the only power event that the different versions of ACTN3 seemed to affect. For activities like throwing a basketball or jumping into the air, performance was unaffected by genotype.

Another study looked at arm strength in a group of people before and after 12 weeks of strength training. ACTN3 genotype appeared to have no effect in men, but women with the TT genotype had lower strength at the beginning of the study. After the training program women with the TT genotype—those without a working copy of alpha-actinin-3—had made greater gains than the women with at least one functioning copy. This was true in both European and Asian women.

Scientists aren't really sure why having alpha-actinin-3 would improve power performance. One theory is that the protein prevents damage in fast-twitch muscle fibers. The group who conducted the study of Greek teenagers thinks this explains why only running and not other power activities were affected by a lack of alpha-actinin-3. Running involves repeated use of the muscles, while jumping only uses muscles once: damage is not an issue.

The scientists who saw that women with the TT genotype were able to build up more strength than other women also think alpha-actinin-3 protects muscle fibers from damage. Muscle damage is what stimulates muscles to adapt and become stronger. Those with the TT genotype lack the protection against damage that alpha-actinin-3 normally provides, thus allowing a greater gain in strength.

Alpha-actinin-3 may also affect athletic performance by virtue of its effects on oxygen usage in muscle. Two studies (one in mice and one in humans) have shown that fast-twtich muscle fibers that lack functional copies of ACTN3 use more oxygen than those with at least one working copy. This type of metabolism might slow them down. Mice studies have also shown that these altered fibers are weaker and smaller than fibers containing alpha-actinin-3, but they are more efficient an resistant to fatigue—a situation that is better suited to endurance sports than sprinting.

It's too bad that such crooks discredit the entire genome testing industry. I've personally been very satisfied with https://www.23andme.com/ , due in large part to their very rigorous criteria before claiming any effect from any particular gene.

Well, nerds of European descent...

The genetic risk of alcoholism and extroversion from 23andMe:
http://spittoon.23andme.com/2011/10/21/genes-and-geography/

And more along the lines of the original story:
Parkinson's and BCC

Well, nerds of European descent...

The genetic risk of alcoholism and extroversion from 23andMe:
http://spittoon.23andme.com/2011/10/21/genes-and-geography/

And more along the lines of the original story:
Parkinson's and BCC

Well, nerds of European descent...

The genetic risk of alcoholism and extroversion from 23andMe:
http://spittoon.23andme.com/2011/10/21/genes-and-geography/

And more along the lines of the original story:
Parkinson's and BCC

https://www.23andme.com/store/cart/

$99 + $9/month

Also, keep in mind that some drugs are more addictive than others based on a person's genetic makeup. According to 23andMe, I'm more prone to heroin addiction than an average person (2.5 to 9.9 times more likely to become addicted vs the typical individual). Due to the same genetic marker (RS1799971), I'm much more likely to become an alcoholic than the typical person (which makes sense, since my mother was an alcoholic, so I most likely inherited the gene from her).

http://www.snpedia.com/index.php/Rs1799971

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/SNP/snp_ref.cgi?rs=1799971

http://spittoon.23andme.com/2011/09/20/snpwatch-genetic-variation-influences-how-we-respond-to-reinforcement/

Conversely though, this genetic marker is also tied to pain tolerance (I have a much higher pain tolerance than a typical person; I was able to go under epi-lasek corrective eye surgery and required no pain medications whatsoever during my recovery period, even though the doctor expected me to need upwards of 20 doses of oxycodone).

The more you know.

If the Government takes a DNA sample, they should be required to run it through 23andMe and give you the results for free. That would provide some benefit. The "criminal" DNA matching systems are far cruder than the 100,000 point analysis 23andMe does.

What is the difference between genotyping and sequencing?

Though you may hear both terms in reference to obtaining information about DNA, genotyping and sequencing refer to slightly different things.

Genotyping is the process of determining which genetic variants an individual possesses. Genotyping can be performed through a variety of different methods, depending on the variants of interest and resources available. At 23andMe, we look at SNPs, and a good way of looking at many SNPs in a single individual is a recently developed technology called a “DNA chip.”

Sequencing is a method used to determine the exact sequence of a certain length of DNA. Depending on the location, a given stretch may include some DNA that varies between individuals, like SNPs, in addition to regions that are constant. So sequencing is one way to genotype someone, but not the only way.

You might wonder, then, why we don't just sequence everyone's entire genome, and find every single genetic variant they possess. Unfortunately, sequencing technology has not yet progressed to the point where it is feasible to sequence an entire genome quickly and cheaply. It took the Human Genome Project over 10 years' work by multiple labs to sequence the three billion base pair genomes of just a few individuals. For now, genotyping technologies such as those used by 23andMe provide an efficient and cost-effective way of obtaining more than enough genetic information for scientists—and you—to study. Copyright © 2007-2011 23andMe, Inc. All rights reserved.

To be sure you have gained interesting information for your $200, but you have neither your sequence, nor a complete list of differences from a reference human sequence, which of course if you did would give you your sequence.
23andme only gives you a list of many SNPs.

I have to wonder if the founders of google have spent most of the last decade having laughing fits over their motto, which makes a promise through negation of a subjective term.

Do no evil.

What does that even mean? Oh, they're going to thump their chests toward China? (admittedly, that's more than most western governments are willing to do these days, but I digress...)

What about the company's mission statement:

To organize the world's information.

Well, it would be difficult to argue the case that this is, in and of itself, evil, but when you consider what "the world's information" encompases, and what controlling that means, it's hard to think otherwise.

Now, a little more on topic, it's clear that google's amassed an army of lawyers and PR Flacks to rival their army of programmers. Makes me wonder whether their business model / management style is just to ensure they are the employer for all the world's language masters - be it natural or artificial. But, hey - free webmail!

If you are not one of these incoming Stanford/Berkeley students, you can get your own testing done for about $500
This company is owned by Google founder, Sergey Brin's wife, Anne.

One item in the article that surprised me: the companies aren't offering information to their clients about diseases they are carriers for. For instance, it would add value to their service if clients knew they carried the gene for cystic fibrosis (a common genetic test).

That's kind of odd, because at least 23andme (haven't checked the others) seems to offer information on whether someone is a cystic fibrosis carrier:

https://www.23andme.com/health/cysticfibrosis/

Cystic Fibrosis (Delta F508 mutation)

Cystic Fibrosis is one of the conditions that 23andMe analyzes. Our service includes the following information:

* Whether or not you are a carrier for the Delta F508 mutation linked to cystic fibrosis.
* Information on i3000001, a marker that influences your carrier status for Cystic Fibrosis.
* Background information on Cystic Fibrosis and a list of counselors, links and support groups in your area.

2. DNA testing
Could happen, but I don't think it will be a common practice in 5 years time.

As seen on Oprah of all places, already down to $400... 23 and me

Her doctor was relieved to find out he can be less concerned about prostrate exams.

23AndMe includes HIV Resistance in their battery of genetic tests.

In theory, the problem of insurance companies and employers discriminating based on genetic information in the US has be 'solved' by the passing of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) this year. I say in theory, because I expect they will find some loophole to enable them to exploit this information anyhow. But we will have to wait and see .... ( http://spittoon.23andme.com/2008/05/21/its-official-bush-signs-gina/ )

Do you have any idea how much DNA analysis costs?

A quick google resulted in an affordable price of $999.
Pocket change to the typical corporate entity. Toilet paper to the typical banker. That's not taking into account who could be doing the work(self interest) or who could be influencing them to get it done(or take a trip to Abu Ghraib).

there is more than enough work examining DNA from crime scenes to keep them busy, without data mining random DNA as well.

Not true. DNA analysis is a rarity in many murder cases. Hell, any investigation at all is uncommon, unless it's a white family with money. Law enforcement doesn't have the budget for them all.

We, by which I mean the DNA analysis crowd, are a long way from anything which could be applied on a large enough scale to pose a genuine threat to someones 'DNA Privacy'.

Forget about DNA privacy, what about my privacy? A simple test can determine whether you're biologically connected to your parents, have diabetes, are lactose intolerant, have bipolar disorder, what you're allergic to, your risk of arthritis, even if you have dry earwax, etc., etc., etc., and why.

Honestly, there are big enough problems to solve without wasting time on sensationalist bullshit like this.

Why should we pick and choose? And I don't see how not being thrilled this information is in the hands of our increasingly corrupt government and law enforcement is "wasting time".

Not sure it is a scam, but it is expensive:
https://www.23andme.com/store/ ($999)
http://www.decodeme.com/index/about_order ($985)

If companies like https://www.23andme.com/ can get 1000$ for a very rough analysis of a persons genome, I wonder how much people would be willing to bid for the 1000 places in this program.

Obviously the 1000 candidates can not be choosen based on their bid alone, but a little online auction with candidates having to fill in a form on their health could probably help raise a significant part of the money needed for the project.

-Bernd

For genetic genealogy purposes, the Genographic Project provides only the minimal information to identify your ultimate ethnic origins (12 markers for the paternal line and the HVR1 region for the maternal line). Family Tree DNA, which is in partnership with the Genographic Project, will expand the testing to 67 markers for the paternal line and the HVR2 region for the maternal line. All told, it's easily several hundred dollars to fully probe the markers commonly thought to be useful for genealogical purposes (like comparing DNA with someone who may share a common ancestor with you).

Now that at least two companies (23andme and decodeme) are offering much more extensive genome scans for $1k, these genetic genealogy companies are going to have to drop their prices to remain competitive. This could be a boon for genealogy geeks!

forget it. Those bastards are supporting GINA

https://www.23andme.com/about/policy/

* The Genetic Nondiscrimination Act of 2007 (GINA) was passed in the U.S. House of Representatives, by a vote of 420-3. The act will protect individuals against discrimination based on their genetic information when it comes to health insurance and employment. These protections are intended to encourage Americans to take advantage of genetic testing as part of their medical care.

I'm not giving $999 to support socialism :[

I can't find who the CEO of 23andme is (after only 30 sec of research), but Anne Wojcicki is indeed at least co-founder of the company and member of the Board of Directors: https://www.23andmeobjects.com/res/1570/pdf/factsheet.pdf

Oh and Google is already involved in this company, they are an investor: https://www.23andme.com/about/corporate