I’m not sure what your experience has been with people who believe in creation over evolution, Larry, but I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone, creationist or evolutionist, who denies the existence of DNA or genetic mutations. I just don’t see how you can possibly believe that people with a well-reasoned believe in a creator “don’t accept science” and are therefore incapable of having a valid view when it comes to genetic testing. That is a big jump in logic from where I’m sitting.

Kristen

Are you saying that people who don’t believe in the theory of evolution (which, for the record, has numerous holes in it) … are of lower intelligence and reasoning capability than others? Because that’s what it sounds like you’re saying.

Yes, with respect to evolution, that’s what I’m saying.

People who don’t accept science (evolution) have no credibility when it comes to discussing genetic testing.

kk

Does everyone reading this honestly believe that the general public is prepared to handle that kind of information? Remember, these are people who don’t believe in evolution and think homeopathy is effective medicine.

Evolution is a theory, not a fact, and homeopathy is effective medicine. What do you think they used for thousands of years before big pharma came on the scene? Complementary and alternative medicine is a large and well-respected field with significant clinical evidence speaking to its effectiveness. Are you saying that people who don’t believe in the theory of evolution (which, for the record, has numerous holes in it) and take echinacea when they feel a cold coming on are of lower intelligence and reasoning capability than others? Because that’s what it sounds like you’re saying.

Kristen

Larry, that is the whole point of this post: understanding the ramifications and why people may choose NOT to undergo genetic testing. You seem to be arguing against the very nature of the post, when if fact it supports what you just said. What am I missing here? Hsien isn’t promoting it. She’s discussing it.

Kristen

It sounds to me like what you’re saying is that you are opposed to genetic testing. So just say that!

I’m not opposed to genetic testing. What I’m opposed to is the promotion of private for-profit genetic testing for the average person who doesn’t understand the ramifications and/or the limitations.

I don’t have a problem with genetic testing that’s done in collaboration with a genetic counselor.

Lisa says,

You are afraid the test might inadvertantly uncover “a nonpaternal event” or show that your parentage is not what you think it is.

Exactly right. Since we know that the frequency of “nonpaternal events” can be as high as 5% in some cases, we should make damn sure that the people who swab their cheeks and plonk down $1000 know what might happen.

It won’t be long before we have reliable tests for one hundred or so genetic predispositions—or more likely “presumed” predispositions. That means that everyone will likely test positive for one of two of them.

Does everyone reading this honestly believe that the general public is prepared to handle that kind of information? Remember, these are people who don’t believe in evolution and think homeopathy is effective medicine.