What is direct to consumer genetic testing actually worth?

b a z
(Credit: Dave Fayram/Flickr)

It’s a situation many have faced before or will in the future: last month, I was up early waiting for a call and a medical update. Unfortunately, the news wasn’t great: a doctor said I had an elevated risk—around two to three times higher than the average person—of developing late-onset Alzheimer’s disease.

On the bright side, this news was complicated.

My regular physician or local hospital didn’t deliver the diagnosis. Instead, a doctor from Turkey contacted me on Skype to go through a detailed analysis of my DNA. Because of some family history with early onset Alzheimer’s and an interest in what’s becoming an emerging field, I sought out some direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing within the last six months. Turns out that these days, it takes nothing more than some money and a mailed spit sample to get a routine DNA exam; a brief glimpse at fate is then conveniently sent to your inbox.

The conclusion these DTC genetics companies draw, if you dig down into the data enough, comes with a number of subtle caveats and complicating factors. While it’s true I have a somewhat increased risk for Alzheimer’s, I already knew that I should eat healthily and exercise regularly. To some extent, my genetic fate was sealed from the moment I was conceived—I can’t change the fact that I have that pesky allele. Yet, there still seems to be an overwhelming likelihood that I won’t develop Alzheimer’s according to these test odds and the uncertainty behind them. Why bother at all with DTC genetics?

Read the full, original story: I had my DNA analyzed, and all I got was this lousy story

Additional Resources: 

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Screenshot-2026-04-13-at-1.39.26-PM
Viewpoint: ‘Safer for children?’ Stonyfield yogurt under fire for deceptive organic marketing
Screenshot-2026-04-22-at-10.46.29-AM
Viewpoint: How to counter science disinformation? Science journalist offers 12 practical tips
ChatGPT-Image-May-7-2026-12_16_37-PM-2
Viewpoint: Are cancer rates ‘skyrocketing’ as RFK, Jr. and MAHA claim? The evidence says mostly the opposite
Picture1-14
When superbugs threaten vulnerable children: Can AI help solve antibiotic resistance?
ChatGPT-Image-May-12-2026-08_39_41-PM
GLP podcast: Big Pharma, Big Ag, Big Food—health harming industries or life-saving innovators?
Screenshot-2026-04-23-at-11.00.36-AM
Regulators' dilemma: Thalidomide, Metformin, and the cost of getting drug approvals wrong
Picture1-1
Cooling the planet with balloons: Could a geoengineering gamble slow global warming?
png-pill-omega-Supp-fish-oil
Millions take omega-3 fish oil for brain health. New research suggests it may do the opposite.
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.