Hi Jean,
I'm not Gabes, obviously, but I do have an opinion on that Scientific American article. IMO it is right on target. This is no different than the wholesale loss of privacy that Facebook has imposed upon all its members, and Google has imposed upon anyone and everyone who uses it's search engine, Android operating system, phones, gmail, etc. It's all about money (isn't it always).
There are no free lunches. Anytime we accept and use a service that is priced way below its actual value, we shouldn't be surprised to discover that in the end, it's not free after all.
The Personal Genome Service isn’t primarily intended to be a medical device. It is a mechanism meant to be a front end for a massive information-gathering operation against an unwitting public.
That's so obvious that it shouldn't need any explanation. On the Internet, for anyone seeking to make money, information is king, and privacy is just another hurdle to be overcome in the routine of doing business on the Internet.
Those of us who have not volunteered to be a part of the grand experiment have even less protection. Even if 23andMe keeps your genome confidential against hackers, corporate takeovers, and the temptations of filthy lucre forever and ever, there is plenty of evidence that there is no such thing as an “anonymous” genome anymore. It is possible to use the internet to identify the owner of a snippet of genetic information and it is getting easier day by day.
By now, surely we have learned that this is true. With last year as a springboard, hackers will probably make 2015 the Year of the Hack, and even doubters will be forced to admit that absolutely nothing we can do on the internet will forever remain private.
If you have several close relatives who are already in 23andMe’s database, the company already essentially has all that it needs to know about you. It is doubtful that 23andMe would be able to protect that information even if it were so inclined.
That's not as obvious (when we decide to go for the deal), but nontheless, it's most definitely true. And regardless of how tight-lipped we might try to be, we have no control over less-restrained relatives.
When I answered the questions on 23andme, I declined (to the extent allowed) all options for sharing information. But I have no illusions that this will keep my data private. It did however (so far at least) prevent anyone from contacting me about ancestry. Of course 23andme couldn't keep from pointing out to me that I am related to celebrities such as Stephen Colbert and Meryl Streep, in the hopes of persuading me to release my data for such purposes. Frankly, I'm no more impressed by that information than those 2 celebrities would be to learn that they were related to me.
The bottom line is, if we want the data, we have to trade our rights to privacy (as always).
Tex
It would be tough to imagine life without it now. The Internet is an awesome resource, to say the least.