8 ms·
This makes me wonder if there could be strong enough laws around protecting genetic info (for example penalties that pierce the corporate veil) that those with
by j-wags 3y ago
This makes me wonder if there could be strong enough laws around protecting genetic info (for example penalties that pierce the corporate veil) that those with fiduciary responsibility to the company could argue that destroying the data is really in the shareholders' best interest.
I'm completely uninformed in this area. Is there precedent for anything like this in the modern day?
- mjevans 3y agoUpgrade this to any medically adjacent data. ALL of the DNA data should be covered under HIPPA or something similar.
- kube-system 3y agoGenetic information is PHI and is already covered under HIPAA. The problem is that, like most companies, 23andMe isn't a HIPAA covered entity. Because they're not a healthcare provider or health insurer, it doesn't apply to them. Genetic information is also controlled by other laws such as GINA. So it is already some of the most controlled health data there is. But that's not a very high bar in the US.
- maxerickson 3y agoIt'd be fun to watch what would happen if data shared with services giving health advice fell under HIPAA. It's not even really that unreasonable, if they want to advertise that they can provide health information, they don't get to pretend that they don't.