Genomics Is Mired In Misunderstanding

"The cost of genome sequencing has fallen drastically", says George Church.  So the question is why are so many people not opting to have any genetic secrets revealed? 

    They have come to the conclusion that the reason people haven't obtained their genome sequence is because there is a failure to communicate the progress to the public.  George Church was in charge of a team registered to compete for US$10-million Archon Genomics X Prize.  It got canceled in August but it highlighted many problems and misunderstandings in genomics.

    The first problem or misunderstanding is that people think genomics is expensive.  The costs have dropped drastically from $3 billion to $1,000 in 2006.  People feel that the genome sequencing should be free due to insurance or the government, but that $1,000 for the cost can be easily made up over a lifetime instead of the costs of ending up in a hospital and having diagnostics.  Along with the costs people probably think that genomics is inaccurate.  When the X Prize Foundation announced the cancellation in August, they claimed, "no company is sequencing whole genomes to the accuracy the contest required".  However the accuracy has improved from 350 kilobases to 2,463 kilobases and the point errors have improved from 1 in 100,000 to 1 in 10 million, which are beyond the X Prize goals.  

     Since 1991, predictive gene tests have risen from 2 to 3,000.  Even the most complex traits are composed of simpler components that can be identified and applied to an individual that isn't classified as at risk, such as height and diabetes.  Even if the the genetic conditions that are identified have no cure, the results are still useful.  In Ashkenazi communities, they get genetic screening done to make lists of suitable marital partners early in life so to avoid those offspring developing Tay-Sachs disease and dozens of other similar diseases.  We can't restrict genomics to only individuals with ethnic or family risks because we are all at risk.  A sufficient reason to get genomes checked is the possibility to find markers for a treatable disease.  
    
     Many critics say that genomics is harmful, however the "US Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) prevents genetics-based discrimination in health insurance and employment".  The question being asked is if the overall benefits outweigh the risks? George Church believes that we need the X Prize more than ever.  I thought this article was very interesting because people have always said how much sequencing of genomes are yet though still slightly high in cost, not ridiculously now and it does seem like it would benefit to check for makers of treatable diseases.

http://ezproxy.stockton.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.stockton.edu:2048/docview/1439021031?accountid=29054
lhttp://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v409/n6822/full/409860a0.html