Sequencing your DNA with a USB dongle and open source code

I'm more curious what the actual threat might look like.

The marginal utility of your particular genome is miniscule. Without deep phenotypic information from biophysical parameters, it is utterly impossible to learn something novel from any single genome. This makes the marginal value of the genome information very low, both to you and any attacker or user. You would not be paid much for your data even if it was sold over and over because the rates are like those for plays on Spotify.

There are not fixed differences between human populations, and there are dramatic pressures to balancing selection that keep diversity focused in key genomic regions that are critical for immune response. This is to say that it would be damn hard to target any single group with a bioweapon. And if you wanted to target a single individual with a genomically targeted bioweapon, you also have physical access, making the problem of getting genomic information without consent trivial.

People often talk about insurance risk. I suppose that's an attack vector. It's also one that can be regulated with laws and social norms. Fwiw I wonder how often this is primarily an American concern.

Imagine a public genome data repository. People donate their genomes to science and post them there for the world to use and learn from. In my opinion, it would be better for an individual to share their data than not. The reasoning is that no matter what is done with the data, the net effect will be that society learns more about the individual's particular genome than those of people who haven't contributed. This will yield better adaptation of the society to the individual. Literally this might mean that a treatment for something affecting the individual is slightly better. In expectation, the worst thing that can happen is that the individual gains more information about themselves.

They sell swab kits directly, or via NFT purchase, for ~$500 for a 30x near complete sequencing (that's 30 passes for over 99.9% vs 0.2% for 23andme et al). The results are stored in an encrypted AMD SEV-E vault to be accessed by big pharma or individuals, only for specific markers, in exchange for the $GENE token paid directly to the genome owner. Figures touted are $50-80 per request. This token is burned as kits are sold, can be staked, offers rewards like DAO membership, can be gifted to charities researching specific diseases in various populations. It can act as a form of UBI in unbanked populations and puts your DNA back in your control.

To me it's the best use of web3 tech I've come across, so disclaimer, I am invested and a DAO member, but it's early in the project still. They are not quite ready for mass marketing. They are moving over to Polygon for very low transaction fees in January, will be launching the first joint NFT/kit sale (the next season might include personal genetically generated art) to fill the vaults with 10k sequenced genomes. They are over half way already through work with charities, but that is the magic number before big pharma can start making queries. Right now though they are quietly building and preparing before marketing plans kick in later in Q1.

Take a look at https://genomes.io where everything is explained in more detail, the team are presented and the tokenomics set out.

TL;dr - for $500 right now you can get your entire genome sequenced, stored in a vault to earn you passive income, if you agree to each query. But wait for the NFT vs buying directly, it will have more perks.

If this can sequence flora, fungi and human DNA for about 10k - I'd buy it, just to experiment and deep dive. That is such a low barrier of entry it itself is interesting.

They are caused by high barriers of entry, which in turn are caused by entrenched elites gatekeeping jobs through absurdly high tuition fees, expecting everybody to take lots of student debt and a very litigation-friendly environment. These costs are then passed on to the general population through a byzantine system of health insurance that leaves a lot of people uninsured.

> Let's take a dream scenario: optimal organisation can make 20% more care available.

In 2020 UK spent 3278 GBP (~4400 USD) per capita on healthcare [1]. USA: 12,530 USD. That's about 3 times less or a difference of 200% [2].

In UK life expectancy is 81.2 years. In USA it is 78.79 years.

3 times more spent to get a worse outcome doesn't seem like "20% difference" to me. Of course there are other factors, but are they enough to overcome 3x difference? I don't think so.

You cannot compare healthcare systems on X doctors per Y patients basis, because the outcomes aren't linear. It's orders of magnitude more expansive to treat many health problems if you go to the doctor 2 years too late. And the outcomes are worse despite the higher costs. Guess what happens when people have to pay a lot for each visit - often they go too late.

[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/472940/public-health-spe.... [2] https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Sta...