Consumer genetic tests and loss of privacy: ‘It’s often the price you pay’

privacy

For a few hundred dollars and a spit sample, you too could take a journey of genetic self-discovery. You may learn some things, but what are you giving away?

The direct-to-consumer market is “a bit of a wild ecosystem right now,” says Robert Green, a medical geneticist at Harvard Medical School who consults for the testing companies Helix and Veritas Genetics. The results can be enlightening, or at least entertaining. But consumer genetic testing also comes with inherent risks, privacy loss being one of them. “It’s often the price you pay,” Green says.

Many consumer genetic testing companies provide lengthy, yet vague, privacy statements written at a college reading level. That makes reading the fine print a slog and deters consumers from doing it. An analysis of the privacy policies of 30 consumer genetic testing companies found that most did not meet international transparency guidelines related to confidentiality, privacy and data use.

[T]he real privacy risk for most people lies in ancestry testing, [bioethicist Kayte] Spector-Bagdady says. Consumers often don’t realize that their genetic data could be combined with the personal information they share in surprising ways, unintentionally revealing more about themselves and unsuspecting family members.

Potential customers should “go in with eyes open,” Green says. That means shopping around, reading the fine print and being aware of how privacy risks may affect you, now and in the future.

Read full, original post: Privacy and consumer genetic testing don’t always mix

{{ 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

Picture1
The FDA couldn’t find a vaccine safety crisis, so it buried its own research
Screenshot-2026-04-22-at-12.21.32-PM
Viewpoint: Why the retracted Monsanto glyphosate study doesn’t change the science—the world’s most popular herbicide is safe 
ChatGPT-Image-May-7-2026-01_23_27-PM-2
Viewpoint: Will AI democratize personalized cancer treatment or fuel medical misinformation?
ChatGPT-Image-May-1-2026-11_42_59-AM-2
Viewpoint: NAD is the wellness grifters latest evidence-lite longevity fad. At least the mice are impressed.
global warming
‘Implausible’: Top climate scientists reject worst-case scenario—soaring temperatures and fast-rising sea levels
ChatGPT-Image-Apr-16-2026-02_56_53-PM
Financial incentives, over diagnosis, and weak oversight: Autism claims are driving up Medicare costs
vax-misinformation-main
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: Limit free speech to blunt social media misinfo?
ChatGPT-Image-May-12-2026-11_27_01-AM-2
AI likely to improve health care, research shows—but not for blacks and ethnic minorities
Screenshot-2026-05-21-at-3.15.53-PM
Chiropractors may no longer be modern-day snake oil salesmen, but the benefits of their therapy are limited–at best
Screenshot-2026-05-21-at-12.15.17-PM
UK gene-editing milestone: Livestock barley that increases ruminant value and reduces methane emissions is first-approved CRISPR crop
modi visit sikkim
Viewpoint: Indian PM wants farmers to switch to 50% organic. It would take at least 10 years, likely won’t work, and isn’t more sustainable
glp menu logo outlined

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