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

23andMe lays off 100 people as DNA test sales decline

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 458 posts

Re: 23andMe lays off 100 people as DNA test sales decline

#231

Post by adrianmonk »

nradov wrote: post #92
jsgo wrote: post #79

> Wojcicki has theories Think the obvious one is that the results are shared and whether someone is a criminal or not (or will be one in the future), people are not particularly comfortable with sharing to parties they didn't initially trust it to for the purposes they trusted it for. Anecdotally, I bought a 23andme kit (just the genealogy one) but never submitted it because the labeling was to send it to the lab in…

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA) specifically prohibits health insurance companies from denying coverage or setting rates based on such tests.

I'm far from an expert, but it also sounds like something that could violate HIPAA.

Re: 23andMe lays off 100 people as DNA test sales decline

#232

Post by evandijk70 »

Ohn0 wrote: post #154
throwaway1777 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New people are being born all the time. There are many industries based around one time purchases. Think appendix removal or weddings (that one may be more than once for some people)

Ah, the lucrative appendix removal industry.

There are 250 000 appendectomies a year in the US, multiplied by 14000 USD => 3.5 billion USD in revenues [1].

[1] https://www.lendingpoint.com/blog/appendectomy-what-it-costs...

Re: 23andMe lays off 100 people as DNA test sales decline

#233

Post by JshWright »

munk-a wrote: post #227
scarmig wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the government encounters one of their kid's DNA, that's enough to identify them as a son/daughter of the person with that DNA profile. If a medical insurance company purchases their DNA, analyzes it, and anticipates that a child of theirs is likely to have medical costs 5x the average, those costs will be passed on to those kids, absent legislation to the contrary. This applies to everyone you're related to, as w…

> If the government encounters one of their kid's DNA, that's enough to identify them as a son/daughter of the person with that DNA profile. I don't believe that's ever been tested in court (so there isn't precedence) and the ways in which DNA are complex enough - and the mutation rate is high enough - that it might be like fingerprints... if you're the only person with DNA that might be like the kind found and you'v…

Joseph DeAngelo was caught because one of his relatives did a 23andMe style test.

Re: 23andMe lays off 100 people as DNA test sales decline

#234

Post by k__ »

dragonwriter wrote: post #3

> Wojcicki has theories, but she doesn’t have clear proof for why consumers are shying away from getting tests Because the ones that want them have gotten them and there's no reason to ever buy the product again once you've done it once. I mean, smartphones are great, but the market for them would have hit a wall pretty quickly if no one ever had a reason to replace them after buying their first.

How come people usually only go to driving school once and these schools still make a living?

Re: 23andMe lays off 100 people as DNA test sales decline

#235

Post by JohnFen »

nradov wrote: post #92
jsgo wrote: post #79

> Wojcicki has theories Think the obvious one is that the results are shared and whether someone is a criminal or not (or will be one in the future), people are not particularly comfortable with sharing to parties they didn't initially trust it to for the purposes they trusted it for. Anecdotally, I bought a 23andme kit (just the genealogy one) but never submitted it because the labeling was to send it to the lab in…

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA) specifically prohibits health insurance companies from denying coverage or setting rates based on such tests.

Companies routinely demonstrate that they're often willing to do prohibited things. And this seems like the sort of thing that would be very hard to prove.

Re: 23andMe lays off 100 people as DNA test sales decline

#236

Post by heavyset_go »

jsgo wrote: post #79

> Wojcicki has theories Think the obvious one is that the results are shared and whether someone is a criminal or not (or will be one in the future), people are not particularly comfortable with sharing to parties they didn't initially trust it to for the purposes they trusted it for. Anecdotally, I bought a 23andme kit (just the genealogy one) but never submitted it because the labeling was to send it to the lab in…

> Well, I don't think I have any pre-existing conditions and certainly don't do drugs, but I don't know about any unknowns on the health side that could impact my insurance if they were to share it to the company. Forget that.

In the US, only health insurance companies are not allowed to use genetic data to increase premiums or deny coverage, at least for now. I'm not sure what the rules are about using data derived from genetic data, however.

Life insurance, disability insurance, long-term care insurance etc companies are allowed to use genetic data to determine costs for policyholders or to deny coverage[1], however.

That fact alone is the reason I won't hand over my genetic data to a third party.

[1] https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/08/07/6360262...

Re: 23andMe lays off 100 people as DNA test sales decline

#237

Post by JshWright »

evandijk70 wrote: post #232
Ohn0 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, the lucrative appendix removal industry.

There are 250 000 appendectomies a year in the US, multiplied by 14000 USD => 3.5 billion USD in revenues [1]. [1] https://www.lendingpoint.com/blog/appendectomy-what-it-costs...

No one is earning a living solely doing appendectomies...

Re: 23andMe lays off 100 people as DNA test sales decline

#238

Post by Ancalagon »

k__ wrote: post #234
dragonwriter wrote: post #3

> Wojcicki has theories, but she doesn’t have clear proof for why consumers are shying away from getting tests Because the ones that want them have gotten them and there's no reason to ever buy the product again once you've done it once. I mean, smartphones are great, but the market for them would have hit a wall pretty quickly if no one ever had a reason to replace them after buying their first.

How come people usually only go to driving school once and these schools still make a living?

driving schools likely have far more customers, a constant influx of customers based on age, and driving (in the US at least) is a necessity, and thus supplies the market. I'm also just spit-balling here: the cost of a tech company's upkeep is FAR MORE than that of a driving school's

Re: 23andMe lays off 100 people as DNA test sales decline

#239

Post by chipotle_coyote »

megablast wrote: post #216
xivzgrev wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. Only so many people willing to spend $100 on a novelty purchase, and they do it once

This makes no sense. Most people only go to paris once, of bunjie jump once, or a billion other things. Just because you do it once doesn't mean it is no sustainable.

While I get what you're saying, "most people only go to Paris once" is a very odd analogy to use in this case. Paris may be a tourist destination, but it's not a tourism company. :)

In any case, I think the caveat to what you're saying is that the sustainability of a business proposition that many people only do once (or at least, do comparatively rarely) also has to take into account the cost. Very people take a Jeep tour of the Grand Canyon, but the Jeep tour company is almost certainly a very lean operation compared to 23andMe.

Re: 23andMe lays off 100 people as DNA test sales decline

#240

Post by heavyset_go »

nradov wrote: post #92
jsgo wrote: post #79

> Wojcicki has theories Think the obvious one is that the results are shared and whether someone is a criminal or not (or will be one in the future), people are not particularly comfortable with sharing to parties they didn't initially trust it to for the purposes they trusted it for. Anecdotally, I bought a 23andme kit (just the genealogy one) but never submitted it because the labeling was to send it to the lab in…

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA) specifically prohibits health insurance companies from denying coverage or setting rates based on such tests.

Life insurance, disability insurance, long-term care insurance etc companies can use genetic data to determine costs for policyholders or to deny coverage[1].

[1] https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/08/07/6360262...

Post reply on HN