Baring Your Genes in Public—A Full Individual Human Genome Sequenced for the First Time

Ronald Bailey | September 4, 2007

Would you want to know your genetic predisposition to alcoholism, coronary artery disease, obesity, Alzheimer's disease, antisocial behavior and conduct disorder? Genome pioneer Craig Venter now does and he is revealing to the whole world that he's got genes that make him more susceptible to them all. Venter and his team have for the first time sequenced a full (diploid) set of human chromosomes--his.

Part of the reason Venter is revealing his genetic information and his medical history is to advance science. As the Washington Post reports:

Venter and others hope that at that point many people will get sequenced and, as Venter has already done with his own, will post their genomes on public databases along with their medical information and family history. That will allow computers to start drawing connections between gene patterns and diseases.

Given the risks involved in such personal revelations, including job discrimination and health insurance woes, no one knows how many people will take that route.

And soon anybody may be able to get an affordable genome sequencing. Again the Post reports:

Cost trends are encouraging. The first 3 billion-letter genome sequences took more than a decade to complete and cost billions of dollars. During Venter's latest project, costs dropped precipitously, and today, several scientists said, an entire diploid genome could probably be done for about $100,000. Some predict that a $1,000 genome will be available within five years.

In addition, Venter's research finds that human genetic diversity is greater than once thought:

The order of building blocks along a strand of DNA encodes genetic information, somewhat like the way a sequence of letters creates a sentence. Particular sequences form genes. Landmark studies published in 2001 indicated that the DNA of any two people is about 99.9 percent alike. The new paper suggests estimates of 99.5 percent to just 99 percent, Venter said.

The Venter paper joins several others published over the past three to four years that indicate an estimate of around 99 percent, said Richard Gibbs, a DNA expert at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston who didn't participate in Venter's study.

The studies produce the lower figure because they uncovered chunks of DNA that differ among people, whereas previous studies focused on differences in individual building blocks.

The 99 percent figure is close to what scientists have often estimated for the similarity between humans and chimps. But the human-chimp similarity drops to more like 95 percent when the more recently discovered kinds of DNA variation are considered, Venter said.

By the way, anyone want to subsidize sequencing my genome? I would be happy to post it and my medical information on an appropriate scientific website.

See the study at PLoS Biology here.

Comments

mith|9.4.07 @ 12:48PM|#

Finally, we'll have the gene responsible for blog post disclaimers!

wsdave|9.4.07 @ 12:55PM|#

So if something happens to him later, will his insurance company find a way to deny his claim based on known pre-disposition vs. previous condition.

"Would you want to know your genetic predisposition to alcoholism, coronary artery disease, obesity, Alzheimer's disease, antisocial behavior and conduct disorder?"

Perhaps the better question is: Will your insurance company want to know?

Abdul|9.4.07 @ 12:56PM|#

Would you want to know your genetic predisposition to alcoholism, coronary artery disease, obesity, Alzheimer's disease, antisocial behavior and conduct disorder?

Genetic predisposition? All this time, I thought it was due to my hard work and dedication.

|9.4.07 @ 1:05PM|#

wsdave: I make some suggestions about how it might be possible to handle the insurance issue here.
And keep in mind that insurance is all about uncertainties. Genetic information is just another part of the modern project to reduce uncertainty.

bill|9.4.07 @ 1:09PM|#

Lately it's become known that perhaps what's more important is your epigenome. This is the way your genes are turned off and on. Google epigenome and methylation if your interested.

|9.4.07 @ 1:13PM|#

antisocial behavior and conduct disorder

So that's why H&R isn't called "Patiently Listen and Gently Rebuke"!

SPD|9.4.07 @ 1:30PM|#

Paging Mr. Huxley... Mr. Huxley, please pick up the white courtesy phone....

|9.4.07 @ 1:48PM|#

This has great potential for helping people make better lifestyle choices. Those with genetic risks for diseases can be extra careful to avoid lifestyle risk factors. It also makes customized medicines more practicle. The bad side is we'll have to work even more to keep medical decisions in the individual's hands instead of medical technocrats. I bet someone claims to find the gene responsible for civil disobedience by 2020.

|9.4.07 @ 1:54PM|#

Ill subsidize yours if you subsidize mine

wsdave|9.4.07 @ 2:22PM|#

Ron,
"And keep in mind that insurance is all about uncertainties. Genetic information is just another part of the modern project to reduce uncertainty."

The issue I have is that, based on family traits and history (and maybe genetics), I should be an obese, diabetic, alcoholic, chain smoking, drug addicted, raving lunitic. All smart-ass comments aside, I am a model of health (save for a motorcycle crash back injury). I don't drink, smoke, use any drugs, or even drink coffee. I never have, and am not in recovery for anything.

Should I be charged for the genetic mistakes of my forefathers? Should my insurance company be able to charge me top dollar for things I'm pre-disposed to do, in spite of over 40 years of never doing them?

The answer is: OF COURSE THEY SHOULD.

But it would still suck to have to pay someone else's mistake.

|9.4.07 @ 2:57PM|#

Should I be charged for the genetic mistakes of my forefathers? Should my insurance company be able to charge me top dollar for things I'm pre-disposed to do, in spite of over 40 years of never doing them?

The answer is: OF COURSE THEY SHOULD.

So what happens when you can't afford insurance and one of these genetic issues (or ones you don't know about) comes back to bite you?

|9.4.07 @ 4:30PM|#

The following is extremely simplistic and invariably true.

KNOWLEGE - GOOD. IGNORANCE - BAD.

With confidence that some here will take me up this - Argue aginst that.

|9.4.07 @ 5:05PM|#

JsubD

what does that sentence even mean?
Knowledge = good
Ignorance = bad
presumably sequencing your genome = knowledge = good while not sequencing your genome = ignorance = bad.
thus all facts = good, all non-facts (opinion, absence of any knowledge) = bad. it follows then: 1+1=2 = good.
2+2=5 = bad.

you probably meant knowledge is good 'for,' like good for making more accurate decisions or ignorant thinking is bad for humanity. unfortunately your universal value designators are meaningless. for an individual contemplating sequencing their DNA, their utility function may be bad if it reveals a terminal illness. Their utility for ignorance is thus high if they don't want to know that. Knowledge is not Good, knowledge IS. Events occur and we each attach dif. meanings to them. You are right that it is a simplistic meme; too simplistic for real life

wsdave|9.4.07 @ 5:22PM|#

Dan T.
"So what happens when you can't afford insurance and one of these genetic issues (or ones you don't know about) comes back to bite you?"

That's the price I pay for living in a "free" society. For better or worse, nobody owes me a living (or a life).

|9.4.07 @ 5:26PM|#

Some predict that a $1,000 genome will be available within five years.

Wow! What if even that is too pessimistic, the way computer price projections were for years? A beneficial snowball effect could ensue when medical purveyors see more and more folk's genomes and start racing to develop preventatives for the predispositions that turn up.

|9.4.07 @ 5:30PM|#

...for an individual contemplating sequencing their DNA, their utility function may be bad if it reveals a terminal illness. Their utility for ignorance is thus high if they don't want to know that. Knowledge is not Good, knowledge IS.

Do you mean to say ignorance of facts is good for some rational adults? If so, I'd have to disagree.

Jason Bobe|9.7.07 @ 6:08PM|#

Ron -

You should check out the Personal Genome Project if you want to participate in genomic research. We'll be focusing on exomes, not full genomes because its much more economical.

We'll have a website up in the 30 days where you can learn more. For now, you should check out George's site at pgen.us

Best,
Jason