>Coercing the public to provide samples of their dna outside of criminal proceedings is unconstitutional. Most people in the US are insured through private com

>Coercing the public to provide samples of their dna outside of criminal proceedings is unconstitutional. Most people in the US are insured through private companies. How would it be unconstitutional for those companies to refuse to insure or jack up prices for people who decline genetic testing? It just seems strange to believe that this data would be both incredibly valuable to health insurers and that they would have no new ways to gather it outside relying on decade old data from now defunct companies. Modern insurance companies don't identify smokers by buying the old Marlboro Miles database, they make disclosing smoking a part of the application process.