278
submitted 13 hours ago by kinther@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ThePowerOfGeek@lemmy.world 8 points 46 minutes ago

I'm so glad I never sent them my DNA. It was tempting from a genealogy perspective. But my concerns about privacy and them selling on customer information always weighed heavier than that temptation.

But I feel a lot of sympathy for those who used their services. For a while they incessantly advertised them, including via paid endorsements from many 'trusted' podcasters and YouTubers. The company's failure should bring to the fore a drive for new laws in many countries to protect consumers' DNA from being monetized and exploited. But sadly we all know it won't.

[-] LordCrom@lemmy.world 17 points 2 hours ago

HA ! Sweet vindication! I've been preaching to friends and family not to use these DNA companies for this and other reasons. They called me a long and I should get my tin foil hat. I cant wait to see their faces

[-] BillMurray@lemmy.world 10 points 56 minutes ago

5 spaces after punctuations seems excessive .

[-] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 4 points 59 minutes ago

Tried to read article but it fades out and can't resd whole thing. Anyone got the article I can read?

[-] Ion@lemmy.myserv.one 4 points 42 minutes ago

23andMe is not doing well. Its stock is on the verge of being delisted. It shut down its in-house drug-development unit last month, only the latest in several rounds of layoffs. Last week, the entire board of directors quit, save for Anne Wojcicki, a co-founder and the company’s CEO. Amid this downward spiral, Wojcicki has said she’ll consider selling 23andMe—which means the DNA of 23andMe’s 15 million customers would be up for sale, too.

23andMe’s trove of genetic data might be its most valuable asset. For about two decades now, since human-genome analysis became quick and common, the A’s, C’s, G’s, and T’s of DNA have allowed long-lost relatives to connect, revealed family secrets, and helped police catch serial killers. Some people’s genomes contain clues to what’s making them sick, or even, occasionally, how their disease should be treated. For most of us, though, consumer tests don’t have much to offer beyond a snapshot of our ancestors’ roots and confirmation of the traits we already know about. (Yes, 23andMe, my eyes are blue.) 23andMe is floundering in part because it hasn’t managed to prove the value of collecting all that sensitive, personal information. And potential buyers may have very different ideas about how to use the company’s DNA data to raise the company’s bottom line. This should concern anyone who has used the service.

DNA might contain health information, but unlike a doctor’s office, 23andMe is not bound by the health-privacy law HIPAA. And the company’s privacy policies make clear that in the event of a merger or an acquisition, customer information is a salable asset. 23andMe promises to ask its customers’ permission before using their data for research or targeted advertising, but that doesn’t mean the next boss will do the same. It says so right there in the fine print: The company reserves the right to update its policies at any time. A spokesperson acknowledged to me this week that the company can’t fully guarantee the sanctity of customer data, but said in a statement that “any scenario which impacts our customer's data would need to be carefully considered. We take the privacy and trust of our customers very seriously, and would strive to maintain commitments outlined in our Privacy Statement.”

Certain parties might take an obvious interest in the secrets of Americans’ genomes. Insurers, for example, would probably like to know about any genetic predispositions that might make you more expensive to them. In the United States, a 2008 law called the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act protects against discrimination by employers and health insurers on the basis of genetic data, but gaps in it exempt providers of life, disability, and long-term-care insurance from such restrictions. That means that if you have, say, a genetic marker that can be correlated with a heart condition, a life insurer could find that out and legally deny you a policy—even if you never actually develop that condition. Law-enforcement agencies rely on DNA data to solve many difficult cases, and although 23andMe says it requires a warrant to share data, some other companies have granted broad access to police. You don’t have to commit a crime to be affected: Because we share large chunks of our genome with relatives, your DNA could be used to implicate a close family member or even a third cousin whom you’ve never met. Information about your ethnicity can also be sensitive, and that’s encoded in your genome, too. That’s all part of why, in 2020, the U.S. military advised its personnel against using consumer tests.

Read: Big Pharma would like your DNA

Spelling out all the potential consequences of an unknown party accessing your DNA is impossible, because scientists’ understanding of the genome is still evolving. Imagine drugmakers trolling your genome to find out what ailments you’re at risk for and then targeting you with ads for drugs to treat them. “There’s a lot of ways that this data might be misused or used in a way that the consumers couldn’t anticipate when they first bought 23andMe,” Suzanne Bernstein, counsel at the Electronic Privacy Information Center, told me. And unlike a password that can be changed after it leaks, once your DNA is out in the wild, it’s out there for good.

Some states, such as California, give consumers additional genetic-privacy rights and might allow DNA data to be deleted ahead of a sale. The 23andMe spokesperson told me that “customers have the ability to download their data and delete their personal accounts.” Companies are also required to notify customers of any changes to terms of service and give them a chance to opt out, though typically such changes take effect automatically after a certain amount of time, whether or not you’ve read through the fine print.

Consumers have assumed this risk without getting much in return. When the first draft of the human genome was unveiled, it was billed as a panacea, hiding within its code secrets that would help each and every one of us unlock a personalized health plan. But most diseases, it turns out, can't be pinned on a single gene. And most people have a boring genome, free of red-flag mutations, which means DNA data just aren’t that useful to them—at least not in this form. And if a DNA test reveals elevated risk for a more common health condition, such as diabetes and heart disease, you probably already know the interventions: eating well, exercising often, getting a solid eight hours of sleep. (To an insurer, though, even a modicum of risk might make someone an unattractive candidate for coverage.) That’s likely a big part of why 23andMe’s sales have slipped. There are only so many people who want to know about their Swedish ancestry, and that, it turns out, is consumer DNA testing’s biggest sell.

Read: DNA tests are uncovering the true prevalence of incest

Wojcicki has pulled 23andMe back from the brink before, after the Food and Drug Administration ordered the company to stop selling its health tests in 2013 until they could be proved safe and effective. In recent months, Wojcicki has explored a variety of options to save the company, including splitting it to separate the cash-burning drug business from the consumer side. Wojcicki has still expressed interest in trying to take the company private herself, but the board rejected her initial offer. 23andMe has until November 4 to raise its shares to at least $1, or be delisted. As that date approaches, a sale looks more and more likely—whether to Wojcicki or someone else.

The risk of DNA data being misused has existed since DNA tests first became available. When customers opt in to participate in drug-development research, third parties already get access to their de-identified DNA data, which can in some cases be linked back to people’s identities after all. Plus, 23andMe has failed to protect its customers’ information in the past—it just agreed to pay $30 million to settle a lawsuit resulting from an October 2023 data breach. But for nearly two decades, the company had an incentive to keep its customers’ data private: 23andMe is a consumer-facing business, and to sell kits, it also needed to win trust. Whoever buys the company’s data may not operate under the same constraints.

[-] Fredselfish@lemmy.world 2 points 34 minutes ago

Thank you that was super helpful. Never trusted any of these companies and glad I haven't given them my dna.

[-] scottywh@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

I'm not a fan of being paranoid.

[-] GooberEar@lemmy.wtf 16 points 4 hours ago

Remember That DNA You Gave 23andMe?

No. When did I do that?

[-] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 1 points 1 hour ago

Ah, by not sending them money every month you agreed to them coming into your room while you slept to harvest your unique juices.

Should have known to opt out of that thing you never signed.

[-] Soup@lemmy.cafe 17 points 4 hours ago

Nope. I wasn’t that fucking stupid. So…. Not me.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 25 points 7 hours ago

I remember I didn't and thank fucking god, because this would have been me:

https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/tech/23andme-user-data-stolen-shkenazi-jewish-users/3336464/

Still waiting for the fallout from that. It won't be pretty.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Deceptichum@quokk.au 17 points 6 hours ago

I’m still glad I did.

Lead me to finding my biological family.

And as far as side effects go, there’s not much they can use it for that will bother me.

[-] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 32 points 6 hours ago

This whole "meh I don't care about privacy, take my data" attitude among younger generations is going to cause us SO MANY PROBLEMS in 20 years.

load more comments (12 replies)
[-] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world -2 points 3 hours ago

I wish you the best of luck when your health insurance rejects your life saving operation because, "you were informed of your genetic predisposition to x and did not take preventative actions for n years."

while you're dealing with your own mortality, you'll also be coming to terms with your own ignorance that put you in that situation.

but don't worry, you're young, you'll live forever.

[-] Deceptichum@quokk.au 11 points 3 hours ago

I have universal healthcare.

Have fun when your private health insurance fucks you over for whatever bullshit reason it picks and you can’t afford to fight it even though you’re in the right?

[-] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

"they didn't come for me."

what a damn fool.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] EleventhHour@lemmy.world 15 points 7 hours ago

I was never so fucking stupid as to give my DNA to them.

[-] callouscomic@lemm.ee 22 points 9 hours ago

People are morons for doing these things and expecting any privacy.

[-] reddig33@lemmy.world 20 points 9 hours ago

23andMe has a “request data deletion” feature. I don’t know if it actually works, but it’s worth a try if you’re worried about it.

[-] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

I assume that all of that is dishonest.

[-] Backlog3231@reddthat.com 9 points 3 hours ago

They don't actually delete anything. They will throw the physical samples away but retain your entire identified genetic code.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17611256

There's a better source out there but I can't find it atm. They hide behind an obscure FDA rule. Something about retaining genetic data for 20 years no matter what or something.

[-] slickgoat@lemmy.world 16 points 8 hours ago

Yep, I had my data deleted. They told me so, but I don't for a second believe it.

[-] Boozilla@lemmy.world 35 points 10 hours ago

23 Data Miners and Me.

[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 93 points 12 hours ago

The worst thing is I’ve never consented to them having my DNA but they have half of it anyway thanks to my brother…

[-] TheOctonaut@mander.xyz 31 points 9 hours ago

They have 98% of it thanks to those damn dirty apes

[-] scottywh@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

And bananas

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 119 points 13 hours ago

DNA might contain health information, but unlike a doctor’s office, 23andMe is not bound by the health-privacy law HIPAA. And the company’s privacy policies make clear that in the event of a merger or an acquisition, customer information is a salable asset. 23andMe promises to ask its customers’ permission before using their data for research or targeted advertising, but that doesn’t mean the next boss will do the same. It says so right there in the fine print: The company reserves the right to update its policies at any time. A spokesperson acknowledged to me this week that the company can’t fully guarantee the sanctity of customer data, but said in a statement that “any scenario which impacts our customer's data would need to be carefully considered. We take the privacy and trust of our customers very seriously, and would strive to maintain commitments outlined in our Privacy Statement.”

[-] whostosay@lemmy.world 50 points 10 hours ago

We take it very seriously, just not as seriously as money.

[-] TheFriar@lemm.ee 3 points 1 hour ago

“I mean, we would have to receive a pretty excellent offer to violate our customers’ privacy—which is super important to us. (We reserve the right to also accept offers ranging from “pretty decent” to “doable,” or in the event of our profits not really getting us hard anymore, we may also accept “any” offer.) Your privacy is very important to us.”

[-] danc4498@lemmy.world 9 points 8 hours ago

There needs to be government protection of your DNA, but the government probably doesn’t want that

[-] Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net 47 points 12 hours ago

stops mid stroke wait, those things are for saliva?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2024
278 points (96.3% liked)

News

22955 readers
4087 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS