Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms 50-50 R&D pact

fiercebiotech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 228 posts

Re: GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms 50-50 R&D pact

#31

Post by mattnewton »

mcculley wrote: post #28
mattnewton wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Insurance is the first one that pops into my mind. That kind of data changes their bet on your risks heavily into their favor and can disadvantage you if your genes show anything corroleated with late onset diseases. Depending on how this information is regulated, it could also affect the insurance for your biological children. For more hypothetical societal risks, I’ll cite the movie Gattica where DNA credentialism…

I mention the insurance risk in my post. Yes, I do think insurance companies will try to use this data. I don't see how to avoid it though. It seems to me that it is inevitable that they will get my DNA at some point. That said, I buy insurance for the unknown risks. If I had a known condition, I would expect that to be factored into the price.

“The insurance companies will eventually win this from us” is different from it currently being required. I will read your post but I don’t buy the inevitability that they will win over reasonable privacy rights.

Insurance only works as a system for society if the risk is spread among many parties, but if the insurance companies know the risk ahead of time it ceases to subsidize the unfortunate, who are left out in the cold (taxpayer funded programs and hospital ERS)

Re: GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms 50-50 R&D pact

#32

Post by dragonwriter »

mattnewton wrote: post #26
mcculley wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand these concerns. I have published my data from 23andMe ( https://enki.org/2017/10/17/publishing-my-genome/ ) ( https://github.com/mcculley/genes-genes ). Can you share what you think the bad outcomes would be? What am I missing? Edit: As people bring up the insurance risk, yes I did consider that and mention it in my post. I am personally not concerned about it and think the advantages outweigh the…

Insurance is the first one that pops into my mind. That kind of data changes their bet on your risks heavily into their favor and can disadvantage you if your genes show anything corroleated with late onset diseases. Depending on how this information is regulated, it could also affect the insurance for your biological children. For more hypothetical societal risks, I’ll cite the movie Gattica where DNA credentialism…

> Currently (IANAL) but I don’t think this would be legal

Currently, it's explicitly illegal under US federal law, but there is also a full-frontal assault going on against consumer protections in the health insurance market in the federal government, so absent a significant change in government direction, I wouldn't bet on it staying that way.

Re: GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms 50-50 R&D pact

#33

Post by breck »

mcculley wrote: post #23
TrainedMonkey wrote: post #3

Make no mistake about what is happening here. GSK is buying access to all of the genetic data that 23andMe has. This is why I am wary to use any 23andMe type of service. "The partners plan to use 23andMe’s data to jointly discover drug targets." They will claim all kinds of protections of course, but it is only a matter of time until genetic data starts being resold.

I don't understand these concerns. I have published my data from 23andMe ( https://enki.org/2017/10/17/publishing-my-genome/ ) ( https://github.com/mcculley/genes-genes ). Can you share what you think the bad outcomes would be? What am I missing? Edit: As people bring up the insurance risk, yes I did consider that and mention it in my post. I am personally not concerned about it and think the advantages outweigh the…

I’ve also done 23andme and am open about my data. I can think of about 3 negative outcomes (maybe insurance problems that could occur without regulation; family privacy issues if someone wanted to track you or a family member down; annoying advertising), and about 1,000 positive outcomes (contributing data to help cure cancer, predict disease susceptibility, drug response, improve general health and wellness, et cetera...).

I think the pros far outweigh the cons.

Sure, 23andme and GSK and others will get richer off this but so what—they are doing something good.

Re: GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms 50-50 R&D pact

#34

Post by mcculley »

mattnewton wrote: post #31
mcculley wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mention the insurance risk in my post. Yes, I do think insurance companies will try to use this data. I don't see how to avoid it though. It seems to me that it is inevitable that they will get my DNA at some point. That said, I buy insurance for the unknown risks. If I had a known condition, I would expect that to be factored into the price.

“The insurance companies will eventually win this from us” is different from it currently being required. I will read your post but I don’t buy the inevitability that they will win over reasonable privacy rights. Insurance only works as a system for society if the risk is spread among many parties, but if the insurance companies know the risk ahead of time it ceases to subsidize the unfortunate, who are left out in t…

I don't think it is just insurance companies who will eventually win. I think everyone will have everybody's DNA.

People who have serious disabilities should be supported by taxpayer funded programs, in my opinion.

Re: GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms 50-50 R&D pact

#35

Post by distant_hat »

throwaway1zz wrote: post #29
mcculley wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand these concerns. I have published my data from 23andMe ( https://enki.org/2017/10/17/publishing-my-genome/ ) ( https://github.com/mcculley/genes-genes ). Can you share what you think the bad outcomes would be? What am I missing? Edit: As people bring up the insurance risk, yes I did consider that and mention it in my post. I am personally not concerned about it and think the advantages outweigh the…

Primary concern is declining insurance coverage, unless 23 and me allows for a anonymous no name test?

de anonymizing genetic data is not that hard. Also, if your relatives opt for it, they can still get a pretty decent picture of your genome so not going for it doesn't necessarily mean you are protected.

Re: GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms 50-50 R&D pact

#36

Post by stochastic_monk »

hkmurakami wrote: post #14
TrainedMonkey wrote: post #3

Make no mistake about what is happening here. GSK is buying access to all of the genetic data that 23andMe has. This is why I am wary to use any 23andMe type of service. "The partners plan to use 23andMe’s data to jointly discover drug targets." They will claim all kinds of protections of course, but it is only a matter of time until genetic data starts being resold.

I wonder if this was in 23&Me’s initial pitch to investors.

No doubt. The same is true of Guardant Health (Roche) and Foundation One (whom I assume were bought by someone else).

Give away or sell tests at a loss to vulnerable cancer patients in search of hope, hoard the data, and sell it to the highest bidder.

Re: GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms 50-50 R&D pact

#37

Post by madspindel »

mattnewton wrote: post #31
mcculley wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mention the insurance risk in my post. Yes, I do think insurance companies will try to use this data. I don't see how to avoid it though. It seems to me that it is inevitable that they will get my DNA at some point. That said, I buy insurance for the unknown risks. If I had a known condition, I would expect that to be factored into the price.

“The insurance companies will eventually win this from us” is different from it currently being required. I will read your post but I don’t buy the inevitability that they will win over reasonable privacy rights. Insurance only works as a system for society if the risk is spread among many parties, but if the insurance companies know the risk ahead of time it ceases to subsidize the unfortunate, who are left out in t…

Living in Sweden, this sounds like a US Only problem. Maybe the solution is tax-funded health care and let corporations do great things with the technology?

Re: GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms 50-50 R&D pact

#38

Post by nradov »

mcculley wrote: post #23
TrainedMonkey wrote: post #3

Make no mistake about what is happening here. GSK is buying access to all of the genetic data that 23andMe has. This is why I am wary to use any 23andMe type of service. "The partners plan to use 23andMe’s data to jointly discover drug targets." They will claim all kinds of protections of course, but it is only a matter of time until genetic data starts being resold.

I don't understand these concerns. I have published my data from 23andMe ( https://enki.org/2017/10/17/publishing-my-genome/ ) ( https://github.com/mcculley/genes-genes ). Can you share what you think the bad outcomes would be? What am I missing? Edit: As people bring up the insurance risk, yes I did consider that and mention it in my post. I am personally not concerned about it and think the advantages outweigh the…

In the USA the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 explicitly prohibits discrimination on the basis of genetic information with respect to health insurance and employment. No one in politically powerful positions has seriously advocated for repealing the law. The insurance companies don't even dislike it because it creates a level playing field; since the market is competitive, even if they were allowed to price health insurance based on genetic risk factors it wouldn't necessarily allow them to earn higher profits.

https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/gina.cfm

Re: GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms 50-50 R&D pact

#39

Post by noja »

throwaway0255 wrote: post #18

I find it seriously scary how 23andMe markets itself. Externally, they're a family company helping you understand your family history and equipping you to anticipate health problems so you can prepare for them. Internally, in presentations to venture capitalists and in job interviews with engineers like me, the picture is quite different. They're building a genetic database and plotting world domination from a thousa…

Can you tell us more?

Re: GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms 50-50 R&D pact

#40

Post by stochastic_monk »

azujus wrote: post #8

It’s sad that you can no longer get your genetic health info in Europe from 23andMe, but does this mean GSK will only have access to American info?

I expect the paperwork you sign explicitly gives them unlimited rights to your data.
Post reply on HN