Are DNA from at-home ancestry tests private? Not always, and some states are cracking down

Credit: Christine Danlioff/MIT
Credit: Christine Danlioff/MIT

If you’ve ever spit into a plastic tube or swabbed your cheek and mailed your saliva away to learn about your ancestry or health risks, you might have assumed that the company analyzing your DNA is legally required to keep your genetic data private. But you’d be wrong.

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, known as HIPAA, protects individuals’ medical information when it’s handled by doctors, hospitals, and health insurance companies. This applies to genetic tests ordered by your doctor but not to those you can buy online directly from companies like 23andMe and Ancestry because these kits aren’t considered medical tests. 

Mis- and disinformation are distorting science and public policy. Subscribe to our Daily and Weekly Digests for incisive coverage of ‘disruptive’ innovations in AI, agricultural biotechnology, food, chemicals, nuclear energy, vaccines, and other disruptive innovations.

That’s a problem, since genetic data can reveal all sorts of sensitive information about you—your ethnicity, your family connections, and even your likelihood of developing Alzheimer’s disease or certain cancers. Law enforcement officers are increasingly using consumer genetic databases to investigate violent crimes.

But a growing number of states are adopting genetic privacy laws in an effort to close these gaps. California became the latest on October 6 when Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law the Genetic Information Privacy Act, which puts restrictions on the data collected by direct-to-consumer DNA testing companies. 

This is an excerpt. Read the original post here.

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-2026-10-01-at-10.52.08-AM
Non-browning CRISPR gene-edited bananas move one step closer to British markets
AI-Force-Leadership-Portrait
Jay Clayton controversy: The divisive history of Trump’s newly-appointed AI czar
Screenshot-2026-09-22-at-10.54.12-AM
‘They misunderstand science’: Research attempting to tie autism to changes in the gut microbiome comes under fire
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Elderly-Speaker-at-MAHA-Institute
At anti-vaccine MAHA conference, RFK Jr. pledges to unify federal health information and combat vaccine safety ‘misinformation’
ChatGPT-Image-Sep-21-2026-11_21_39-AM
Viewpoint: Food cults: Online ‘nutrition communities’ can pose unique dangers
Screenshot 2026-10-01 at 12.30
Combating ‘narrative distortion’: Will pharma companies step up to challenge health misinformation?
ChatGPT-Image-Sep-10-2026-10_36_07-AM
Viewpoint: Even lousy scientific articles can shield authors when they hype dubious health claims and products
Screenshot-2026-10-01-at-11.21.27-AM
Vaccine hesitancy, like malaria, surges globally, topping 35% in some countries
glp menu logo outlined

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