Genetic testing: Do we really want to know?

COMSCI 6

Paul Thompson, thomp649@msu.edu, Agricultural, Food and Community Ethics, Michigan State University, Professor of Philosophy, East Lansing, MI 48824
Despite obvious beneficial uses, increasing availability of genomic information gives rise to three well known problems: abuse, the “genetic divide,” and the global erosion of cultural autonomy. Abuses include unwarranted claims and putative allegations of genetically based efficacy, as well as privacy and insurance. The term “genetic divide” has been used to indicate the way that benefits from genomics research will very likely be inequitably distributed. Finally, it is reasonable to surmise that genomic findings will be integrated into a trend toward global governance of all activities according to quantitative standards, a trend that often achieves improvements in public health or environmental goals at the expense of an ever more complex web of expert authority. More troubling than any of these problem areas, however, is scientists' continuing refusal assume any institutional responsibility for effecting any of the available remedies to them, while pressing ahead relentlessly with the research that brings them about. In the absence of science-based attempts to grapple with these issues, it is entirely reasonable to be “against” genomics.