1. gnxp
  2. The transparent biological society

The transparent biological society

By razib on March 5, 2009.

FuturePundit has some musings on the possiblities of $100 genome sequencing in 5 years:

Cheap portable DNA sequencers will also lead to surreptitious DNA sequencing of people without their awareness. I expect to see this on the dating and bar scene. I also expect to see it in job interview and business negotiation situations. Check to see if your potential employee or business partner has genes that give them cognitive traits to avoid or embrace.

To be frank, this seems to b aiming too low. After all, why look to genetic profiles which suggest potentialities or probabilities? If you can get a biological sample could you not simply directly assay for a specific biochemical state? What I'm saying is that if you are looking for a particular cognitive profile, a better bet than genes might be to simply calculate the chemical state at a given moment.

Tags
genetics
Transparent Society

More like this

Ancient Sex Scandals: Did We Get It On With Neandertals?
This week, Science published two papers about the genetics of Neandertals from a team of scientists based at the Max Planck Institute of Evolutionary Anthropology. The first (which is the only one anyone seems to really care about) gives a draft version of the entire Neandertal genome - a whopping…
Wine Science: extreme edition
At the beginning of this past week, I did a post on some of the science behind the aroma of coffee, so I thought it would be fitting to talk a bit about wine as well. Not because I'm a wine afinionado (not even close), but mainly because I had the opportunity to write a piece for Maisonneuve…
Am I really related to Cleopatra? Qualitatively measuring DNA sequence quality
What do genetic testing and genealogy have in common? The easy answer is that they're both used by people who are trying to find out who they are, in more ways than one. Another answer is that both tests can involve DNA sequence data. And that leads us to another question. If the sequence of my…
Good for cops, bad for geneticists?
A recent PLoS Genetics paper triggered a sea change in the way genetic data is handled by research institutions like the NIH, the Broad Institute, and the Wellcome Trust. The paper, which came out last month, demonstrated that it's possible to identify a single individual's DNA in a pool of DNA…

Can you elaborate on the nature of these "biochemical states", and how the can be used to "measure" certain things about an individual (like a cognitive profile or whatever)?

Can you elaborate on the nature of these "biochemical states", and how the can be used to "measure" certain things about an individual (like a cognitive profile or whatever)?

i'm thinking of dopamine levels and what not. i don't know how big of a blood sample you'd need for that, but it would be better to get just get the levels of a chemical X, then the genes which produce the chemicals.

and of course many men would benefit from biochemical clues that "she's just not into" them :-) dudes aren't the best at reading faces & mannerisms.

I guess it depends how much information you can get about the relevant biochemistry from an available biological sample. You can get DNA pretty easily from a discarded glass or cigarette butt, but I suspect it would be pretty difficult (if not impossible) to get an accurate picture of neurotransmitter levels from the same type of trace sample.

But in principle I agree - information about proximal biochemistry (which integrates over both genetic and environmental causes) would be preferable to more distantly associated genetic profiles, if you can get it.