Genome of DNA discoverer is deciphered

The sequencing of James D. Watson's genome could be the gateway to an era of personalized genomic medicine.
The New York Times

The story "Genome of DNA discoverer is deciphered" published June 1, 2007 at 7:13 AM is no longer available on CNET News.

Content from The New York Times expires after 7 days.

[Nkully86]

Two Things...

1) I know this is one of the great debates of the human genome project, but why would Watson want to know everything about his genome EXCEPT the gene for Alzheimer's? I understand that at his age this is a very apparent concern, but I am sure there is more to be concerned about than just that one disease.

2) Just read a NYT article about about a new company out called 23andMe.com that will offer customers their own genomes for as low as $1000. Now I am pro Human Genome Project, however at a price like this, it could become the standard eventually for people and their families to know their health fates before they hit puberty.

[jrkaas]

sacred choices

So if we can find out our health fates, are people going to have any hope of changing them? Curing themselves, finding a cure, finding one for a loved one?

In most natural medicines one of the most important parts of the healing process is that one has a vision of health in the future... That includes without the physical or spiritual aspects of disease. If someone knows their fate is the shade of doubt going to be too large to overcome where once it could?

[misslizzi]

No Cure & Not Fate

Even though he surely knows that one's genes do not equal one's fate, Dr. Watson might prefer not to know his *chances* of getting Alzheimer's since, at this time, there is no cure for this debilitative disease.

As someone who won a Nobel prize for the works of his mind, he might perhaps be afraid of losing his mental faculties the most. Given the person in question, that's quite an understandable fear!!!

[lacedgrad]

Misleading Headline

The use of the word "deciphered" in the headline and the body of this article is extremely misleading. According to the body of the article, Watson's genome has not been deciphered; it has merely been read. What has been done is the equivalent of a young child reading a college textbook. A child with a solid understanding of phonics may read an advanced text aloud, but they will only understand a small portion of it.

Humans are like small children when it comes to genomes. We can read (sequence) them, as has been done for Watson, but we only understand the meaning behind a small portion of the sequence. We need a much larger sample of complete genomes along with medical and historical records in order to actually decipher the meaning behind the sequence.

[marileev]

Genome Privacy

Privacy issues abound with making your gene sequence publically available. We're so cautious these days w/public information (i.e. HIPAA), but this opens up a new can of worms <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.essentialsecurity.com/news_business.htm?id=828" target="_newWindow">http://www.essentialsecurity.com/news_business.htm?id=828</a> What safeguards/precautions are being taken to protect the individuals in the study?

The article said "...taking a considerable personal risk in making their genomes publicly available. As is probably true for everyone, their genomes are likely to contain mutations that could lead to disease, revealing possibly unfavorable information about themselves and their relatives."

[william.e.ward]

I'm not a luddite, but....

Quote: Dr. Amy L. McGuire, a medical ethicist at the Baylor College of Medicine who was involved in the Watson sequencing project, said Watson and Venter were following the medical tradition of making oneself the first subject of a new experiment and would incur unknown risks.


This was the theme of an entire novel that now seems, to me, to be more prophetic than I thought, though obviously it's not quite as dire as the novel makes out.... "The Strange Case of Dr. Jeckell and Mr. Hyde". Perhaps NOW is the time to begin examining some of the concerns raised in that book?