Hacker News Reader

Comment by PicassoCTs | Hacker News Reader

And thank you random citizen, for offering the DNA of yours and your family + decedents to all insurance companies out there.

View on HN

"Eschew flamebait. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

The paternalistic lecturing around here is unreal. Grandparent didn't ask for your opinion about 23andme privacy policies, and it's not remotely on topic.

To be fair, you aren’t making the decision just for yourself when you sell your data to 23andme. You’re doing it for all your relatives and descendants too. The GP made the pint flippantly but I think it is worth seriously considering whether business models like that should be allowed.

Nitpicking individuals is not likely to address that problem. And it wasn't even close to the subject of conversation. This is simple common decency. It also happens to be HN guidelines:

Eschew flamebait. Avoid unrelated controversies and generic tangents

It is illegal for insurance companies to use that data (in the US at least).

No, it's only illegal for health insurance providers to discriminate based on genetic data, but other types of insurers are free to use it. The legislation that makes it illegal also doesn't apply if your employer employs less than 15 people.

Naïvely speaking, 23andMe cannot trade your data to anybody...

They obviously cooperate with subpoenas they receive, and I would not ve surprised if a data breach happens at some point

I wonder if there is an anonymous version of the service.

There is absolutely no way an insurance company would risk using stolen genetic data to tweak their premiums.

Would they love to buy the data legally? Of course. But they are not going to buy it off of Russian hackers.

https://www.businessinsider.com/why-gsk-invested-300-million...

They sell it to drug makers for studies.. and if they sell metadata to this pairing (drug + your id) this is a giveaway for inherited genetic diseases.

It's hard for me to be upset at my data helping cure disease and save lives like this.

It's very naive to assume it'll only ever be used for benevolent purposes.

The situation the above commenter was bringing up was that in the near future your genetic information has a good chance of being used by insurance companies pre-judge you, your offspring and your relatives to raise or lower healthcare rates based on information found in that data.

> pre-judge you

If it’s based off accurate genetic data, is it still prejudgment? We already accept that car insurance is higher for young males without getting mad about it.

Using all available data to make a proper risk assessment seems like a reasonable thing to do.

I see this as an extension of the idea that we should not be the sole bearer of the consequences of burdens that are not our fault. Where is the fairness in my having both a shortened lifespan and the financial devastation of a chronic, terminal illness? There is none.

(This was meant as a reply to a sibling comment but the "reply" button is absent).

If your genetics predispose you for a shorter life, you can benefit financially by not having to save for retirement.

Genetic predisposition is not a sure thing, so I think most people would still save for retirement, genetics aside. I'm somewhat convinced that I will die young of health complications or social strife in the wake of global warming, but I am still saving for retirement. In any case, I think it is unreasonable to claim that it evens out somehow. It's unfortunate that most people don't learn how strong an advantage it is to be in good health until they aren't anymore.

I was more thinking that you could buy a cheaper pension plan if you're expected to die at 70 rather than 85, on average.

The pension company can handle the uncertainty, since it averages out.

We know my genetic info is being used today in research that cures disease and saves lives.

I sleep well knowing that.

You're saying that there is a "good chance" that some time in the future US insurance companies will illegally use this info to deny people insurance.

I disagree with that probability analysis. Time will tell.

Since it has already been brought up... is there a hypothetical way to anonymously submit your data? Say, an alias and using a Visa gift card, perhaps?

Even if there was, you need to be aware that the DNA has much more personal information than your name and surname, there can be multiple Joe Does, but probably just you with your DNA. Also Joe Doe doesn't tell anything about your race, sex, appearance, nor conditions while DNA can. Using the DNA you can be traced even if you submit it anonymously e.g. one of your relatives may upload their DNA which will point to you.

> Also Joe Doe doesn't tell anything about your race, sex, appearance, nor conditions while DNA can.

Strange thing to say. Joe Doe is male, and Anglophone.

OP only offered their own DNA, and received a service they desired in return.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com