Why I'm Not Deleting My 23andMe Genetic Data
And you shouldn't be panicked into doing it either.

Various corners of the media and internet are hyperventilating over the alleged genetic privacy implications of the imminent Chapter 11 bankruptcy of the direct-to-consumer genetic testing company 23andMe.
"Delete your DNA from 23andMe right now," yelps a headline over at The Washington Post. Why? "Unless you take action, there is a risk your genetic information could end up in someone else's hands—and used in ways you had never considered," ominously warns Post journalist Geoffrey Fowler. NPR reports that Suzanne Bernstein, counsel at the nonprofit Electronic Privacy Information Center, advises that any concerned 23andMe customers should delete their data, request that their saliva sample be destroyed, and revoke any permissions they may have given to use their genetic information for research. "This is just the first example of a company like this with tremendous amounts of sensitive data being bought or sold," she added. California Attorney General Rob Bonta urgently issued a consumer alert reminding "Californians of their right to direct the deletion of their genetic data under the Genetic Information Privacy Act (GIPA) and California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA)."
Calm down people. Genetic data are not especially toxic or extraordinarily dangerous. Nor are the privacy implications all that dire, especially compared to other widely available and easily deployed surveillance tools. It is true that your genome is a permanent and immutable marker of your personal identity, but so too are your fingerprints and your face. The FBI's Next Generation Identification system contains the fingerprints of more than 186 million criminal, civil, and military individuals. (As a twenty-something, I worked briefly as a federal bureaucrat so my fingerprints are definitely in the system.) While fingerprints have to be collected onsite and compared using offsite databases, facial recognition cameras with real-time database matching can become ubiquitous, able to track you nearly everywhere you go in public. Your face may be your passport but it's also your snitch.
Another often-expressed concern is that your genetic data could be used to identify relatives who have committed crimes. Police are now regularly using forensic genetic genealogy to identify suspects. They compare a DNA sample from a crime scene with commercial DNA databases, searching for genetic similarities among customers who may be relatives. Genealogists then identify likely suspects by cross-referencing the genetic data with traditional genealogical sources, such as census records, birth and death certificates, and so forth. It is worth noting that 23andMe requires a warrant to release customer data to the police, unlike some other direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies. In addition, the FBI's National DNA Index contains over 18,135,382 offender profiles, 5,774,055 arrestee profiles, and 1,391,726 forensic profiles as of January 2025.
Data deletion alarmists point out that 23andMe suffered a data breach in 2023 in which the records of nearly 7 million of its customers were stolen by a hacker. Sounds bad, but do you know who else suffered recent data breaches? Hospital and medical records companies: some 2.7 million patient records held by ESO Solutions; 9 million held by medical transcription firm Perry Johnson & Associates; 8.5 million at Welltok; and 11 million at HCA Healthcare. All of these were just in 2023. Overall, healthcare breaches exposed 385 million patient records between 2010 to 2022.
Hackers typically demand a ransom to unencrypt pilfered files, but also often engage in double extortion by also threatening to publicly release them. Medical records companies pay because they fear that data exposure can lead to legal consequences, regulatory fines, and reputational damage. Much less commonly, hackers try to blackmail individual patients. A couple of such instances involved attempts to blackmail patients at a Finnish mental health clinic and a Florida plastic surgery practice.
Compare the consequences of these non-genetic database breaches to how information from the 23andMe data breach could supposedly be misused. One suggestion is that your genetic data might be used to blackmail you. If you've committed an unsolved murder or a rape or have produced stray progeny, you might worry about the prospect of blackmail. Data such as names, addresses, and birth dates stored by 23andMe might be used to impersonate you, but that is not a risk particular to the genetic information collected by 23andMe. More far-fetched is the notion that your genetic data might somehow contribute to the creation of a bioweapon.
But what about genetic discrimination? The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA) forbids employers and health insurers from requiring genetic data from you or using it to discriminate against you. For example, health insurers may not use genetic information to determine if someone is eligible for insurance or to make coverage, underwriting, or premium-setting decisions.
However, GINA does not cover life, disability, or long-term care insurance. So far, Florida is the only state that forbids life and long-term insurance providers to cancel, limit, or deny coverage or establish differentials in insurance rates based on genetic information. In any case, no life insurance companies so far require any genetic testing or access to direct-to-consumer genetic data when issuing policies. They can, however, consider any genetic data that is included as a matter of course in a person's medical records, which somewhat paradoxically can lead to insights about a patient's genetics.
Let me use myself as an example. A few years back I was seeking to purchase some additional life insurance, which involved disclosing my medical records, a physical exam, and some blood tests. Based on a specific blood test revealing slightly elevated NT-ProBNP levels, the company doubled its offered premium. I turned down the insurance, but I was intrigued by the data suggesting possible heart failure.
To make a long story short, MRIs found that I did have a touch of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) that has very slightly thickened the walls of my left ventricle. Initial genetic testing by Invitae reported an inconclusive test result showing a change in the TNNC1 gene that may or may not cause or contribute to HCM. Subsequent evaluation eventually concluded that the variant does contribute to HCM. Hopefully, the information about my TNNC1 variant will be of use to others in the future. The good news is that the interaction of that genetic variant with my environment has resulted in a very mild version of the malady, such that my cardiologist assures me my HCM genetics is not what is going to kill me.
More cases of non-genetic medical tests uncovering genetic contributions to ailments are already on the way. For example, recent very accurate blood tests can diagnose the development of Alzheimer's disease years in advance. Whereas tests for gene variants associated with late-onset Alzheimer's identify increased risk of the malady. For what it's worth, my 23andMe test results tell me that I do not carry the Alzheimer's high-risk APOE4 variant. So far as I can tell, no life or long-term care insurance companies are requiring such blood tests yet, but given my NT-ProBNP experience, they will likely include them soon. And insurers doubtlessly will now take Alzheimer's blood test results into account if they turn up in your medical records.
Let's consider privacy with respect to medical versus genetic data. All of us experience some self-consciousness about the infirmities and illnesses that inevitably afflict us. That self-consciousness stems partially from the fact that none of us wants to be regarded by others as weak and incompetent, unable to pull our own weight. Our medical records document the toll that time takes on our bodies. So privacy protections (the damnable Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act—a topic for another time) are supposed to provide us with some measure of control over what we reveal to others as we curate our public images as independent and capable agents.
But how self-conscious should a person be about their genetic information? I interviewed Michael Cariaso, developer of the online genetic analysis tool Promethease, for my 2011 article on the early days of direct-to-consumer genetic testing. Asked why he had not publicly posted his genetic testing results, he responded, "someone later might discover that I have genes for a short penis and low intelligence." Undeterred by similar concerns, I posted online my 23andMe genetic screening results at SNPedia, where I invite anyone to review my numerous genetic flaws.
My 23andMe health predisposition reports suggest that I have gene variants that put me at higher risk for coronary artery disease, gallstones, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, atrial fibrillation, and severe acne. I list those specifically because I have recently had medical tests that show no coronary artery blockages, no gallstones, a normal liver, and a regularly beating heart. I confess that I had a morbidly bad case of acne back in high school. With respect to the other high-risk variants identified by my genetic screening tests, none have resulted in any noticeable illnesses as yet. Other genes (certainly not my clean living) not sequenced or identified yet by 23andMe are likely counteracting the deleterious effects of the higher-risk variants.
Clearly, I think that the deletists' claim that the genetic information held by 23andMe is especially "sensitive" is wrong. I invite my fellow 23andMe customers to consider why nearly 80 percent of you agreed to participate in 23andMe research efforts. Besides hoping to gain some insights about yourself, you also want to help advance medical science. The company may or may not survive, but its stored genetic data remains a scientifically and medically valuable resource that some other research firm or institution may use to help develop new treatments and cures. Keep that in mind and resist being panicked into deleting your data for some speculative gain in privacy.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
A better choice, Ron, would’ve been to never give them your data to begin with.
Nobody cares Bailey.
I read it to see how they could turn it into the Orange man is bad
Orange Man bad?!? He BAD, all right! He SOOO BAD, He be GOOD! He be GREAT! He Make America Great Again!
We KNOW He can Make America Great Again, because, as a bad-ass businessman, He Made Himself and His Family Great Again! He Pussy Grabber in Chief!
See The Atlantic article https://feedreader.com/observe/theatlantic.com/politics%252Farchive%252F2016%252F10%252Fdonald-trump-scandals%252F474726%252F%253Futm_source%253Dfeed/+view
“The Many Scandals of Donald Trump: A Cheat Sheet” or this one…
https://reason.com/2019/09/02/republicans-choose-trumpism-over-property-rights-and-the-rule-of-law/
He pussy-grab His creditors in 6 bankruptcies, His illegal sub-human workers ripped off of pay on His building projects, and His “students” in His fake Get-Rich-like-Me realty schools, and so on. So, He has a GREAT record of ripping others off! So SURELY He can rip off other nations, other ethnic groups, etc., in trade wars and border wars, for the benefit of ALL of us!!!
All Hail to THE Pussy Grabber in Chief!!!
Most of all, HAIL the Chief, for having revoked karma! What comes around, will no longer go around!!! The Donald has figured out that all of the un-Americans are SOOO stupid, that we can pussy-grab them all day, every day, and they will NEVER think of pussy-grabbing us right back!
Orange Man Bad-Ass Pussy-Grabber all right!
We CAN grab all the pussy, all the time, and NONE will be smart enough to EVER grab our pussies right back!
These voters simply cannot or will not recognize the central illusion of politics… You can pussy-grab all of the people some of the time, and you can pussy-grab some of the people all of the time, but you cannot pussy-grab all of the people all of the time! Sooner or later, karma catches up, and the others will pussy-grab you right back!
It just tells me that we should be deleting this kind of data right away.
If you’re afraid your 23andMe data will be Hoovered up by Uncle Sam, you’re too late. Third party doctrine and all. Government requires a warrant or an arrest to swab your cheek, and for good reason. But with 23andMe you’re giving it to them on a platter. So just assume that your DNA is in a government database if you were dumb enough to send it to one of these companies.
I doubt deleting your 23 and Me information actually does that.
The ChiComs still have their data backup.
It does not. Right now I fear some nefarious organisation is using my dna to build a super sexy super funny super soldier. The plebes will look upon him and love him and fear him and send him money on his only fans page.
The same people worrying about this are the same that double mask, or afraid of runners. They are paranoid about everything.
The only thing worse than being paranoid is finding out you're not.
Also the same people that would be perfectly ok with the gubmint having it.
I donated genetic material to the “Field of Wet Dreams” sperm bank. If you build it, they will come.
More testes needed.
Semengly so nobody there gets sacked.
That took balls.
Well, now. I am deeply conflicted.
WaPo says delete, which means it is a bad idea.
Baily says don't delete, which means it is a good idea.
Oh, wait, I never sent mine in.
More testing needed.
Did... did the health insurance industry write this article?
You aren't kidding. This joker can hold these views, though I don't find any of his arguments remotely valid. But why the fuck a "libertarian" magazine would publish this collectivist pablum is beyond me. About the closest he gets to individual rights is your individual right NOT to protect your individual rights and information.
the horse has left the barn
They already sold it all when they faked the password breach.
So, just because there're already databases of other biomarkers, adding just one more is no big deal, right?
@Ron Bailey, we get it. You have a hard-on for technology. It's so hard, in fact, that you
forgetconveniently ignore the implications for personal liberty.It'll be a cold day in a fictional hell I don't believe in before I hand genetic data over to some fly-by-night like 23andMe. (Or anybody else.)
How could anybody have not thought this breach would happen eventually?
It's "in the cloud" maaaan. Isn't the cool?
So this is the DNA version of "if you haven't done anything wrong, you have nothing to fear"? What happened to lubbertarian commitment to privacy uber alles?
^ Gets it.
Why I Mask, Socially Distance, and am Quadruple Vaccinated
Ron, give us a science article on the history and features of Signal. This week.
Thanks.
Calm down people. Genetic data are not especially toxic or extraordinarily dangerous. Nor are the privacy implications all that dire, especially compared to other widely available and easily deployed surveillance tools…It is worth noting that 23andMe requires a warrant to release customer data to the police…
Just quit publishing this guy’s shit already, Reason
When WaPo and Ron are opposed on a subject, just be glad you avoided it completely in the first place.
Let me start by saying I am not a customer of any genetic testing company. I have no problem with the idea, but I would not myself get tested by a large commercial company. I might for a specific medical reason, but as I have no medical reason, and so I see no reason to get tested. If I was a customer, I would be concerned that the same guarantee of privacy I was given at testing might not be honored by the successor to 23 and me. So, to be on the safe side I get the data deleted.
"" If I was a customer, I would be concerned that the same guarantee of privacy ""
Consider the definition of privacy has changed from keeping people from see it, to defining who can see it. So it's just a question of a policy change or law update.
.
The danger here is not that someone will correctly match your DNA to someone else's or to a crime scene sample. The danger here is that someone will INCORRECTLY match your DNA. It takes a lengthy career and years of training to even do such matches, let alone get it right, traits that law enforcement and most hackers DO NOT HAVE!
Nor are the privacy implications all that dire, especially compared to other widely available and easily deployed surveillance tools.
Yeah, like that camera and license plate scanning system Reason keeps demanding cities put in place.