> have job offers rescinded, or be targeted by scams
Can you expand on this?
I understand the insurance thing due to genetic diseases and so on, but which jobs would I be denied for based on genetic information which wouldn’t be checked anyways?
I can only come up with stuff like colorblindness but that would probably be checked anyways if it were a strict requirement for the job so keeping the DNA secret wouldn’t help.
I see most comments concentrated on employment. For a scam, think of someone that has been told they have a specific genetic disease, and that information is available in their DNA "data". As a scammer, I can start to send you information about alternative health treatments specific to your disease, that have no scientific backing to them. Since I'm a scammer, I can write anything I want to, like stating that the information is backed by FDA approval and even put statements like that in the fine print to build up my credibility. You could also try and sell fake services that wipe your released DNA information from databases online. There's a lot of potential for scams if you can link what people think is private (DNA), and their email/personal information.
When I was younger, I read a lot of ethics course material, and spent a lot of time thinking about how someone could get around existing laws or technology, and most of it boils down to most people believing what they're told with a bit of coaxing (building that credibility; social engineering). Luckily, I never went ahead using this information, and have actually turned down projects where my morals were put into question, but I think it prepared me to be more conscious of scams and shady advertising. I work for a digital advertising agency, and use an adblocker during my development work so I can see how a site is useful or mostly worthless when someone turns ad networks/tracking off. One of the benefits of working for a smaller company.
Why not do all of this without the data. Saves the scammer a lot of money up front. Scammers are pros at making up plausible stories. And yet here we are 15 years into 23andMe —- have you ever heard of a genetics scam? I have not.
Well, I have, actually. There are heir-hunter scams. You're contacted by someone claiming to be from a lost heir hunting company. These companies claim to track down the closest relatives to people who died without known heirs, in return they get a share of the inheritance. So you can't bypass them, they won't tell you who you're supposedly the heir of. They promise they're not asking for money, only a share... until they do ask for money, of course.
This scam doesn't use your actual DNA data though, just the fact that you have a profile on a DNA site.
>>> And what’s the scam angle when the DNA is known?
A person with apparent authority, telling people something about themselves, that they believed to be hidden, is a tactic for gaining psychological control. A strong-minded person should be able to withstand it under normal circumstances, but we're not all strong-minded under all circumstances. Hence the power of things like personality tests, police interrogations, and so forth.
This would be wholly illegal, but companies could screen candidates prior to extending offers to them. After they get your primary details and history, they can look you up in the gene database. They could look for a whole host of genetic markers, including but not limited to:
- Markers like ADHD and other neurodivergence and performance signals
- Disease likelihoods to reduce their insurance burden. Cardiovascular, cancer, neurodegeneration, etc.
- Markers for intelligence and tenacity. Personality type. Conversely, dishonesty, neuroticism, etc.
They could screen for literally any hypothetical condition that could in theory impact performance, risk, cost, etc. By excluding candidates with "low genetic scores", they might think they're saving margin.
There is a ton of literature beyond what 23andMe is legally allowed to report on with respect to the SNP data they collect. These studies report on a wide range of phenotypical states and behaviors that could impact job performance. The stack of research is deep.
> And what’s the scam angle when the DNA is known?
Look for any markers that indicate IQ, agreeableness, neurodegeneration, schizophrenia, personality type, etc. It gives scammers a hypothetically better hit rate.
And again, they don't need your DNA to do this. Just a relative's.
> 1.3x to 11.5x Increased risk of autoimmune thyroid disease
> 1.3x higher risk of ER+ breast cancer
> 2 - 3x higher prostate cancer risk if routinely exposed to the pesticide fonofos
> 1.5x - 2x increased risk for cervical cancer, HNSCC, and breast cancer
> 2x risk of Alzheimer's disease
> Lack of empathy? You have a SNP in the oxytocin receptor which may make you less empathetic than other people.
> Increased risk of Multiple Sclerosis.
> HLA-DRB11501 carrier; higher multiple sclerosis risk Rs3135391(C;T) is highly correlated with the HLA-DRB11501 allele. There is a 3x higher risk of multiple sclerosis associated with the (C;T) genotype.
> 1.4x higher risk of lupus increased risk of Systemic lupus erythematosus.
(And on and on...)
This is stuff that 23andme can't legally show you, and many of the studies are small and inconclusive. But many of the disease markers are noteworthy.
None of those are particularly useful on an individual level. E.g.:
- 1.42x risk of Autism
Okay, great, the population incidence is about 1 in 36, so 1.42x risk is about 1 in 25. What possible actionable use is this? It's not even particularly useful input to "should I follow up with some kind of actual assessment".
But even that and the other not-particularly-useful numeric risk multipliers are better than:
- You have a SNP in the oxytocin receptor which may make you less empathetic than other people.
At this level of specificity, you may as well be consulting a magic 8-ball.
Yes, those are tiny relative risk scores for large diverse (messy) POPULATIONS. They are absolutely NOT individual predictions. Even the most sophisticated polygenic risk score are jokes for most traits—-particularly psychosocial traits.
You want actionable information— a 30 minute interview.
A 15 min interview will give them 100X more data than a VCF file or even a 30X whole genome. The list of traits you enumerated are definitely not well predicted by a VCF file.
Can you expand on this?
I understand the insurance thing due to genetic diseases and so on, but which jobs would I be denied for based on genetic information which wouldn’t be checked anyways?
I can only come up with stuff like colorblindness but that would probably be checked anyways if it were a strict requirement for the job so keeping the DNA secret wouldn’t help.
And what’s the scam angle when the DNA is known?