In Reversal, Genetics Group Says Patients Should Be Allowed to Refuse 'Incidental' Findings
By Jennifer Couzin-Frankel,
Science
| 04. 01. 2014
Apparently bowing to pressure from its members, the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) says that patients should be allowed to “opt out” of learning about how their DNA might increase their risk of disease. The policy,
announced today, reverses a
controversial recommendation that the group made last year. It urged clinicians to tell people undergoing genomic sequencing whether their genes might make them more likely to develop serious disease in the future, even if they didn’t want that information.
The original ACMG policy aimed to offer much-needed guidance in the area of so-called incidental findings, which are increasingly presenting a conundrum in medicine and research. As the cost of gene sequencing drops, DNA being sequenced for one purpose may yield many other secrets, such as the risk of certain cancers and Alzheimer’s disease. Almost exactly a year ago, ACMG
proposed a radical shift in how incidental findings are handled. Not only did it say that findings should be shared with patients—it also argued that labs should actively look for certain DNA mutations in someone whose...
Related Articles
By Katie Palmer and Usha Lee McFarling, Stat | 09.03.2024
Photo by Hush Naidoo Jade Photography on Unsplash
Pediatrician Alexandra Epee-Bounya had had enough. In her 20 years caring for children in Boston, she had seen hundreds of kids with suspected urinary tract infections. Each time, she’d turn to a...
By Emily R. Klancher Merchant, Los Angeles Review of Books | 08.22.2024
IN THE Operation Varsity Blues scandal of 2019, 50 wealthy parents were charged with trying to get their children into elite universities through fraudulent means. The story dramatically demonstrated the lengths to which some parents will go to ensure their...
By Julia Brown, The Conversation | 08.16.2024
With their primary goal to advance scientific knowledge, most scientists are not trained or incentivized to think through the societal implications of the technologies they are developing. Even in genomic medicine, which is geared toward benefiting future patients, time and...
By Antonio Regalado, MIT Technology Review | 08.22.2024
In 2016, I attended a large meeting of journalists in Washington, DC. The keynote speaker was Jennifer Doudna, who just a few years before had co-invented CRISPR, a revolutionary method of changing genes that was sweeping across biology labs because...