Everything you wanted to know about genetics but were afraid to ask

It’s official: Matt Herper reported today in Forbes that the $1,000 genome will arrive in 2010, ushering in a new era of genetic medicine.  For years, now, the $1,000 price tag has been the symbolic goal for affordable gene sequencing, the must-have first step for personalized medicine.  How does personalized medicine work? Here’s an example from Joseph Milton’s Financial Times article “Cancer ‘maps’ pave way for tailored drugs.” If a cancer patient could afford to have his/her genome sequenced, their doctor would be able to identify that patient’s cancer-causing mutations and prescribe drugs to suppress those genes, i.e.; the specific genes causing that individual’s cancer. Personalized. Medicine.

And, what does an era of genetic medicine mean for healthcare communicators? It means being prepared to speak to your organization’s impact on genetic medicine, or the impact of genetic medicine on your organization.  For those who feel the need for a genetics refresher, I recommend “The Bluffer’s Guide to Genetics” by Gwen Acton.  Gwen is one of those rare scientists who can be clear as day to non-scientists like myself, while being hilarious.

In “The Bluffer’s Guide to Genetics,” Gwen, an MIT graduate and Harvard professor who now runs a business consulting practice (that I have no connection with) succinctly covers DNA, genes, heredity, the human genome project, genetic engineering, genetic research, human genetics and much, much more.

Gwen also gives good advice on navigating the issues that come with the genetics territory, such as privacy concerns, intelligence, personality, addiction, sex and race. She writes:

“Scientists are cautious about expressing opinions on such subjects, and news bulletins in these areas are hardly issued before they are retracted, refuted, changed or modified. Even if reports come from top universities, they are still highly controversial. They are also subjects about which people form very strong sentiments, so facts tend to be selectively pulled out to support or refute personal beliefs.

You would be wise, when these topics arise, to prepare a one-size-fits-all rejoinder. The terms ‘validation’ or ‘confirmed’ are extremely useful here. Scientists will always try to repeat or replicate experiments in order to make sure they are correct. Therefore, you may happily enquire whether or not the results of certain findings have been validated – a ploy that gently implies judgement should be withheld until they are. You are pretty safe because they rarely have, which is why they are so hotly debated and usually later retracted. Then steer the conversation to safer ground…..”

Now, if “The Bluffer’s Guide” would come out with a book on pricing and access….

Leave a Reply
RSHC copyright © 2009