>One of the really interesting things about the human genome project was that the scientists involved knew that these sorts of hard questions would come up, so

>One of the really interesting things about the human genome project was that the scientists involved knew that these sorts of hard questions would come up, so they really emphasized the human and counseling aspect of the research, in addition to the hard science. How paternalistic of them. These questions are hard because they are personal, and not the sort of thing that should be regulated. >Now, let's say you've met someone and convince them to get a genetic test, and they turn out to also be a carrier, what do you do? Do you risk the 1/4 chance? That's my choice. Otherwise, it wouldn't have been. Though it isn't that important for phenylketonuria, it might have been a deal-breaker if I were a carrier of sickle-cell. You're dancing around my point here. Some of the information they provide is iron-clad binary, and can be very useful. Most people may not get more out of it than slight increases or decreases in their relative risk, but some will find out things that are life-changing. The last time 23andMe came up, one HN commentator said that he found out that he was likely to be lactose-intolerant from it, so he changed his diet and it changed his life. He had lived with the symptoms for so long that he just assumed that was how life was supposed to be. Here's what Sergei Brin got out of it: http://too.blogspot.com/2008/09/lrrk2.html http://too.blogspot.com/2008/09/lrrk2.html I don't understand your motivation for wanting to forcibly withhold this information from people.