Genome sequencing is supposed to be the future of medicine — a revolution that will bring about a new age of tailored treatments and unprecedented insight into people’s individual biology. But perhaps nowhere are the “what if?” questions raised by genome sequencing more complex and ethically treacherous than at birth: Should we sequence the DNA of healthy newborn babies?
[T]hose insights could also be muddled, complicated and unnecessarily worrisome due to the evolving and incomplete scientific understanding of what it means to carry any particular version of a gene — called a variant.The first surprise is that it’s just a much harder road than anyone expected to get families to sign up.
The second insight has to do with the information itself. Genetic test results seem like they should be reassuringly binary: You have a gene mutation or not. But the truth is that what we know about our genes is in flux and that even a gene that has been linked convincingly to a disease won’t always cause the disease in every person. And even if the link between the gene and the disease is well-established, what to do with the information may not be clear.
The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis. Read full, original post: Will babies be better off if we know their genes?
