User:WisotzkiBio/sandbox

GEL 2012 class

Peters

Vera Peters (28 April 1911 – 1 October 1993) was a Canadian doctor and clinical investigator. She received her medical degree from the University of Toronto in the 1930s. In 1950 she published a landmark paper demonstrating for the first time that many patients with early Hodgkin's disease, then considered incurable, could in fact be completely cured if given high-dose radiation. She later went on to study the use of radiation therapy in the treatment of breast cancer.

Controversy

There is a heavy debate as to how relevant the results of personal genome kits are and whether or not the ramifications of knowing one’s predisposition to a disease is worth the potential psychological stress. There are also three potential problems associated with the validity of personal genome kits. The first issue is the test’s validity. Handling errors of the sample increases the likelihood for errors which could affect the validity of results. The second affects the clinical validity, which could affect the test’s ability to detect or predict associated disorders. The third problem is the clinical utility of personal genome kits and associated risks, benefits of introducing them into clinical practices. Doctors are currently conducting tests for which some of them are not correctly trained to interpret the results. Many are unaware of how SNPs respond to one another. This results in presenting the client with potentially misleading and worrisome results which could strain the already overloaded health care system (Lea et al., 2011). This may antagonize the individual to make uneducated decisions such as unhealthy lifestyle choices and family planning modifications. Moreover, negative results which may potentially be inaccurate, theoretically decrease the quality of life and mental health of the individual (such as increased depression and extensive anxiety). There is also controversy regarding the concerns with companies testing individuals DNA. There are issues such as “leaking” information, the right to privacy and what responsibility the company has to ensure this does not happen. Regulation rules are not clearly laid out. There are concerns regarding who should have access to the information, who’s DNA it is once it is tested and concerns with the ownership of the genotypic and phenotypic information stored in the databases. What is still not determined who legally owns the genome information; the company or the individual whose genome has been read. There has been published examples of personal genome information being exploited have been recorded. A politician looking to disqualify a rival from winning an electoral race gained access to their opponent’s DNA using it against them. Another example was a woman who secretly tested the DNA of several partners before deciding whom to conceive a child with. ).	Conversely, sequencing one’s genome would allow for more personalized medical treatments using pharmacogenomics; the use of genetic information to select for appropriate drugs . Treatments can be catered to the individual and the certain genetic predispositions they may have (such as personalized chemotherapy). One could register for an organ donor list in advanced, if the probably that they may need a transplant is high long before their organ reaches critical state.   This is where strong advocates, individuals, doctors and medical groups of genetic kits, will push this advancement due to its possibility of saving lives via personalized medicine.