Spitting Parties - the Fashionable Approach to Genetic Risk?
(October 1st 2008) Rich and famous socialites have found a new gimmick to liven up their cocktail parties - spitting! Welcome to the glamorous end of the DNA testing market, reports Jeremy Garwood.
Do you really want to know your genetic risk factors for heart disease, obesity, diabetes, throat cancer, or caffeine metabolism? Several companies now provide commercial services to analyse DNA samples for a list of polymorphisms known to be associated with diseases and other genetic traits. However, concerns have been raised at the marketing strategy of the company '23andMe', that glamorises DNA testing through its celebrity and high society 'Spit Parties'.
'23andMe' (whose name refers to the 23 pairs of human chromosomes) was founded by Anne Wojcicki, wife to one of Google's founders, whose wealth and 'social networking' account for its celebrity parties. Known spitters include Rupert Murdoch, Harvey Weinstein, and Donald Trump's daughter. However, their less glamorous service passes by the internet - you can order your spitting kit online. For $399 (recently reduced from last year's launch price of $999), you receive the sterile tube by post, fill it with saliva, add a conserving agent, and mail it back to them.
'23andMe' then extracts your DNA and identifies your particular set of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs = single letter variations in gene sequences among the human population, some of which have been associated with certain diseases and health risks) using a BeadChip from Illumina Inc. Although there are an estimated 10 million SNPs in the human genome, this BeadChip only reads 550,000 SNPs, representing a subset corresponding to known health markers.
The final results can be accessed online after about a month and then you can begin your "personal journey of genetic discovery" - the personal DNA profile includes 89 genetic markers that reveal details of the customers' ancestry, proclivites to certain diseases, and other genetic traits such as 'appetite for sugar' and responsiveness to antidepressants.
'23andMe' also encourages you to "connect genetically with friends, family, and others across the globe" using their appropriately named 'Spittoon' blog site.
Although comprehensive DNA tests may one day be a normal part of medical care, the promotion by '23andMe' of genetic testing as an impulse buy disturbs many researchers.
"People think if you have money to spend on this, why not buy a test instead of a model train for Christmas," Dr. Alan Guttmacher, acting director of the National Human Genome Research Institute of the National Institutes of Health told the
New York Times.
"It can be neat and fun, but it can also have deep psychological implications, both for how you view yourself and how others view you, depending on who else has access to the information."
The main rivals to '23andMe', Navigenics and DeCODEme, do not offer social networking capabilities. Kari Stefansson, the chief executive of DeCODEme, which is based in Iceland, said 23andMe is in the entertainment business, unlike his company, which has made many genome research discoveries.
"We are looking at DeCODEme as a serious product for analysis of medical issues," he said.
'23andMe' insists that its chief goal is to advance science by compiling a database of genetic information that medical researchers can tap (while protecting customers' anonymity). Customers cannot opt out of having their information anonymously shared, but they can refuse to participate in surveys focusing on specific traits.
When customers see their results on the screen, they are instructed about which findings are based on widely accepted science and which are less certain because the research is considered preliminary.
A recent editorial in the
New England Journal of Medicine said it was premature to use consumer DNA testing for making decisions about health suggesting that people could better spend their money on a gym membership.
"There are very few observational studies and almost no clinical trials that demonstrate the risks and benefits associated with screening for individual gene variants - let alone testing for many hundreds of thousands of variants. Thus, any claim to clinical utility currently rests on the assumption that interventions that have proven successful in the general population will behave the same way in a genetically at-risk population."
To which the other founder of '23andMe', Linda Avey, replied: "We totally agree it's premature. This information isn't ready for diagnostic purposes or for necessarily taking any kind of action. We're really more about building a new research paradigm. We want to align ourselves with the research community so our customers feel like they're actively engaged in a process." Even if it's just a talking and spitting game at a cocktail party?
Furthermore the legislation on DNA testing is still being worked out. In the UK, there is currently a moratorium on UK insurers' use of genetic testing data to set insurance premiums, but that only lasts until 2014. Perhaps new customers won't be forced to get a DNA profile, but any tests they've already had could conceivably be used to judge their health risks.
In the US, the New York State Department of Health sent letters informing DNA testing companies that it is illegal to offer medical tests in New York without proper licensing. But apparently this didn't prevent '23andMe' from holding Spit Parties during last month's New York Fashion Week. And in 23andMe's home state of California, the state's Department of Public Health issued cease-and-desist orders to 13 companies over concerns that they weren't competent enough to offer genetic counselling.
