Quantcast
Channel: DNA
Viewing all 463 articles
Browse latest View live

A collaboration between Google’s secretive life-extension spinoff and popular genetics company Ancestry has quietly ended

$
0
0

Helix DNA 6

  • Genetics testing company 23andMe made headlines last week when it announced it would share consumers' anonymized genetic data with pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline.
  • Companies like 23andMe frequently share customer DNA data with other institutions, also known as "third parties."
  • Ancestry, another popular company like 23andMe, had a partnership with Google's stealthy life extension spinoff Calico to study the genetics of longevity. That partnership has now ended.

As is often the case in the world of scientific research partnerships, almost as quickly as a new deal begins, another ends.

Popular spit-in-a-tube genetics-testing company 23andMe made a splash last week when it announced a plan to share the anonymized genetic data of millions of consumers with pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline to help the company develop new drugs. 

Ancestry, which maintains a database of genetic information built on the spit samples of more than 5 million consumers, had been partnering with Google's stealthy life extension spinoff Calico to study aging and longevity. The agreement, which was finalized almost exactly three years ago, recently ended, an Ancestry spokesperson told Business Insider.

Apart from a 2015 press release announcing the agreement, neither company has said much about what the research partnership did.

Genetic testing companies frequently share customer DNA data with other institutions. These can include public research groups like state universities or private drug makers like GSK.

Looking at genetic data for clues to a long life

Calico was ostensibly interested in sorting through Ancestry's treasure trove of genetic data to identify commonalities among people who live a long time. Data on individuals who live longer-than-expected lives compared to their shorter-lived family members might be especially useful. This could reveal common genetic traits among those longer-lived folks that might play a role in helping them outlast their peers.

"The Calico science team decided, what if we used a data set like what Ancestry.com has to identify people who have a longer-than-expected lifespan in their family?" Ken Chahine, the senior vice president and general manager of Ancestry, told Business Insider back in 2015.

Since then, neither company has published any research from the collaboration, but that doesn't mean none was produced, someone familiar with Calico's work told Business Insider. 

“Ancestry previously had a relationship with Calico which focused on understanding human longevity and developing ways that all of us can lead longer and healthier lives,” an Ancestry spokesperson told Business Insider, adding, “This relationship has now ended.”

According to Calico, some of the results of its research with Ancestry will be published in a peer-reviewed journal soon. 

Ancestry can share your anonymized genetic data with third parties like Calico if you opt-in to what the company calls an "informed consent to research." This option comes up after you submit your spit sample during the online registration process. (If you decline the opt-in, your data will not be shared with third parties, the company says.)

Those third party groups can include for-profit private companies like Calico as well as nonprofit research groups like the University of Utah and the American Society of Human Genetics — both of which still have active partnerships with Ancestry.

How to delete your DNA data

If you choose to share your genetic data with a company like Ancestry or 23andMe, it can be a difficult decision to undo. Once you opt-in, the company will not wipe your genetic information from any "active or completed research projects," according to its latest privacy statement. 

However, if you'd like to stop your DNA data from being used for new research, you can.

Use the navigation bar at the top of the homepage to select "DNA." On the page with your name at the top, scroll to the upper right corner, select "settings," then go to "delete test results" on the column on the right side. Doing this will result in Ancestry deleting the following within 30 days: "All genetic information, including any derivative genetic information (ethnicity estimates, genetic relative matches, etc.) from our production, development, analytics, and research systems."

If you want to take the additional step of having the company discard your physical spit sample, you must call member services.

SEE ALSO: DNA-testing company 23andMe has signed a $300 million deal with a drug giant. Here's how to delete your data if that freaks you out.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Super-Earths are real and they could be an even better place for life than Earth


DNA-testing companies like 23andMe sell your genetic data to drugmakers and other Silicon Valley startups

$
0
0

Pills


Perhaps you didn't intend for that spit sample you shipped off to be used for research on antacids. But that could be what happens with some of the data that genetics-testing companies like Ancestry, 23andMe, and Helix have collected from billions of customers and stored in their databases.

Both Ancestry and 23andMe have a history of sharing anonymized consumer data with private companies, also known as "third parties." Last week, 23andMe took that policy to a new level when it announced a plan to share the genetic data of millions of consumers with pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline to help the company develop new drugs.

23andMe also collaborates with handful of other drug companies and with institutions like P&G Beauty, the company behind Pantene shampoo and the antacid Pepto-Bismol.

Helix, the genetics-testing company spun out of Illumina, has partnerships with roughly 25 companies as well.

Here are the private companies that the biggest genetics-testing companies share data with

GenentechApart from its partnership with GlaxoSmithKline, 23andMe has active partnerships with at least four other large pharmaceutical companies: Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Biogen, Pfizer, and Genentech.

Another 23andMe collaborator is P&G Beauty, the company behind products like Crest toothpaste, Ivory soap, and Bounty paper towels. In addition to these private partners, 23andMe shares its data with several public academic institutions and nonprofit research groups like the University of Chicago.

Ancestry, which maintains a 5-million-person consumer database of genetic information, once partnered with Google's stealthy life-extension spinoff Calico to study aging. But a company spokesperson told Business Insider that Ancestry is currently only partnered with universities and research institutions. These include the University of Utah and the American Society of Human Genetics.

Helix has active partnerships with about 25 companies, according to Justin Kao, Helix's co-founder and senior vice president of business development. Kao told Business Insider that the list includes at-home lab testing startup EverlyWell and healthcare provider Geisinger Health.

But unlike Ancestry or 23andMe, which have shared the data of millions of anonymized customers with private companies, Helix does so only when the user consents via one of those company partners. EverlyWell, for example, uses Helix's technology to offer customers at-home DNA tests for food sensitivity and metabolism, while National Geographic uses Helix for its genealogy tests. Those companies may prompt a user to opt into research that they are doing, and only then would their data be shared.

Why genetics testing companies share your data with third parties

Helix DNA 6A big reason genetics-testing companies share data with third parties is for research. Many scientists want to learn more about the genetic roots of various conditions and diseases in the hope that this information will lead to better treatments or even cures. Both nonprofit academic institutions and drug companies are doing this kind of work.

"We all have some disease or health issue that we care about. 23andMe has created a research platform to enable interested customers to participate in research — to not wait for solutions to appear, but for people to come together and make discoveries happen," 23andMe CEO Anne Wojcicki wrote in a letter to customers after the deal with GlaxoSmithKline was announced. 23andMe did not respond to a request for further comment.

The average customer who chooses to let 23andMe share their data for research contributes to more than 230 studies on topics including asthma, lupus, and Parkinson's disease, the company says.

Similarly, Ancestry's partnership with Google's Calico was aimed at studying the genetics of longevity, though neither company has yet published any research that resulted from the collaboration. 

How to choose what data you share — or delete it altogether

When you register your spit sample with Ancestry, 23andMe, or Helix, you're offered choices about whether you want to share your data, when, and with whom. However, privacy advocates have pointed out that these options can often be confusing. 

Plus, when asking customers whether they agree to share their data with third parties, Ancestry, 23andMe, and Helix all use different language to describe the choices and present the option at a different stages in the sign-up process. That can make wiping your data from any of those platforms difficult and time-consuming.

Furthermore, if a leak or hack were to happen, such incidents could allow your data to find its way elsewhere, perhaps without your knowledge.

It may also be difficult to prevent your data from being used by a new collaborator who wasn't partnered with one of these companies when you initially signed up.

Through 23andMe's 4-year partnership with GSK, for example, GSK gets anonymized summaries of data from customers who've opted to share their data for research. Privacy advocates find that vexing because the data of existing customers who may have previously opted into sharing their data could now be included as part of the larger base of data shared with GSK.

"The very setup of this venture suggests that its initiators are not quite serious about 23andMe's customers' informed consent," Udo Schuklenk, a professor of bioethics at Queen's University, told Business Insider via email.

It's not easy to delete your information from genetics-testing platforms after you've signed up. (If you want to delete your genetic data from one of these sites, check out our guide). If you've opted to share your data for research, 23andMe could keep your physical spit sample — and the genetic data gleaned from it — for up to a decade.

SEE ALSO: DNA-testing company 23andMe has signed a $300 million deal with a drug giant. Here's how to delete your data if that freaks you out.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Astronomers just discovered 12 new moons around Jupiter

Is marrying your cousin actually dangerous?

$
0
0

Do babies born between two cousins actually have a higher chance of having birth defects? Understanding basic genetic principles will help with this question. Following is a transcript of the video.

What did Queen Victoria, Charles Darwin, and Albert Einstein have in common? They all married their first cousins. You’d think Darwin of all people would know better. After all, mating with a close relative passes on bad genes that lead to deadly genetic mutations, right?

Today marrying your first cousin is illegal in 24 US states. But for most of Western history, people had to marry whoever lived nearby, which oftentimes meant marrying within the extended family.

In fact, between 1650-1850, the average married couple was fourth cousins. So, they had the same great-great-great-grandparents.

Genetically speaking that means they shared 0.20% of their DNA. Not much when you compare it to third(0.78%), second(3.13%), and especially first cousins(12.5%). And, the more DNA you share, the greater the chance your offspring will have a genetic disease — like cystic fibrosis or sickle-cell anemia.

But here’s the thing: You don’t have to be sick in order to give your child a genetic disease.

Take cystic fibrosis. It’s caused by a defect in the CFTR gene. But you need two copies of the defective gene to actually get the disease. So, if you only have one defective copy, you’re unaffected. Instead, you’re what’s called a carrier.

Now, if one carrier mates with a non-carrier, there’s no risk of the kids getting sick. But when both parents carry a defective copy of CFTR, then the kids have a 25% chance of inheriting two copies of the gene and having the disease.

So to see how dangerous it is to marry your first cousin, we need to calculate the chances that two first cousins both carry a copy of the same genetic disease.

Since they share a set of grandparents, we’ll start there. Now it becomes a game of “what ifs”: What if both grandparents are carriers vs. just one? What if one of their children is a carrier vs. none at all? And what if those children marry other carriers, or not? It can get very complicated, very quickly.

But scientists have crunched the numbers and it turns out the risk that the cousins have a kid who inherits a genetic disease is 4-7%. For the general population, it’s 3-4%.

So, not a big deal right? Here’s the catch: That’s the odds for one genetic disease. But there are thousands that could be hiding in your family tree.

Plus, if your kids also marry their first cousins and their kids marry their first cousins it’s a recipe for disaster. Because instead of introducing new, potentially helpful genes into the family gene pool, you’re recycling the old — and possibly dangerous — ones.

Take Emperor Ferdinand I of Austria. His parents were first cousins twice over! And when he was born, he wasn’t especially healthy. So, as far as marrying your cousin is concerned, you shouldn’t make it a family tradition.

Join the conversation about this story »

Akouos, a biotech startup that's trying to tackle a $750 billion global problem, just announced it's raised a new funding round

$
0
0

dna

  • Boston-based biotech startup Akouos is the first of its kind to use a precision medicine approach to hearing loss
  • The company announced $50 million in Series A funding on Tuesday.
  • The funding will help Akouos advance its first program into human trials, support its pipeline for therapies, and build out both its team and its platform. 

Akouos is a new biotech startup that's trying to address a $750 billion problem: hearing loss. 

Manny Simons, co-founder and CEO of Akouos, spent his college and grad school years figuring out the biology of the ear and how to deliver drugs to the right parts of the ear. His interests drew him to his now co-founders at Massachusetts Eye and Ear about 15 years ago. 

The Boston-based company announced on Tuesday that it raised $50 million in its Series A funding round. It was co-led by Seed investors 5AM Ventures and New Enterprise Associates (NEA), followed by Partners Innovation Fund, Sofinnova Ventures, RA Capital Management and Novartis Venture Fund.

The company is the first to use a precision medicine approach to hearing loss.  

"We identify specific forms of hearing loss that are genetically driven, well characterized, and we’re delivering specific genes to particular target cells within the inner ear with a goal of restoring hearing," explained Manny Simons, CEO and co-founder of Akouos.

According to the World Health Organization, 466 million people worldwide have disabling hearing loss, and by 2050, that number is estimated to rise to over 900 million. Hearing loss could be caused by genetics, health complications, certain infectious diseases, chronic ear infections, the use of particular drugs, exposure to excessive noise, and aging. 

"For many forms of hearing loss, the cause is complex. We’re still understanding it," said Simons. "We started with a focus on the forms of hearing loss that are best understood because those are the ones we feel we have the best opportunity to have a dramatic impact."

The genetic forms of hearing loss are all a form of sensorineural hearing loss, which results from dysfunction or damage to the sensory cells themselves, or to the neurons they connect to. That type of hearing loss is not addressable by hearing aids, and there are currently no FDA approved drugs for them. Over 150 genes are implicated in these monogenic forms of deafness, and Akouos is focusing on several of these genes. 

The gene therapy works by using a special type of virus as the delivery vessel for genetic material to target cells. They are directly delivered to the inner ear via a minimally invasive surgical procedure through the round window membrane of the ear. The process is currently preclinical, with its first program intended to undergo regulatory review from the FDA is next year. With added direction, the team will then work to better determine the design of the first in-human studies. 

"The five year plan is to have multiple gene therapies in clinical development with a lead demonstrating clinical efficacy by that time," said Simons. 

The funding will support the advancement of the first program into human studies. It will also help advance the pipeline behind it throughout clinical development and help build out the team.

 

SEE ALSO: A medical diagnostics startup that wants to use CRISPR technology to detect diseases just raised $23 million in venture funding

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How NASA saved the world

A DNA site helped a man find his birth mother after he was left in a phone booth 64 years ago

$
0
0

phone booth

  • Arizona resident Steve Dennis was left in a phone booth 64 years ago.
  • After doing an online ancestry DNA test, Dennis found his birth mother, according to the Lancaster Eagle Gazette.
  • Dennis plans to meet with his birth mother for the first time this month.
  • He may still never know his real birthday.

Almost 64 years ago, a baby was found abandoned in a phone booth, and, though this news made headlines, people were unable to locate the baby's mother. This week, however, the decades-long mystery was put to rest after a man discovered he was actually that baby. And it was all thanks to an online DNA test. 

DNA helped Steve Dennis find his birth family.

Phoenix, Arizona resident Steve Dennis— who was quickly adopted after having been left in a phone booth just off of US 22 right outside Lancaster, Ohio — would have had no idea about any of this if his daughters hadn’t bought him an Ancestry.com DNA testing kit.

A first cousin who had also used Ancestry.com was found after Dennis submitted his swabs, according to the Lancaster Eagle Gazette.

That cousin then sent a message to Dennis that said, "I think I know who your mother is. We’ve heard throughout our lives that there’s a baby that we’re related to that was left in a telephone booth," reported the Lancaster Eagle Gazette.

Through that cousin, Dennis reconnected with a half-sister — who also knew this story about the baby in the phone booth, reported the Lancaster Eagle Gazette. All the kids in the family had heard the story, so Dennis’ half-sister got a DNA test as well to confirm their relationship. It was a match.

Dennis said he hadn’t wondered where he came from because his family loved him — and had told him a different story.

Dennis’ adopted parents had told him since he was a very young child that he was adopted. He told the Lancaster Eagle Gazette that he never heard about the baby in the phone booth until he was a teenager. By that point, he dismissed it as an urban legend — it was too wild to be real.

Steve Dennis told the Lancaster Eagle Gazette that as far as he’s concerned, his adopted parents are his real parents — but he wouldn’t mind learning his actual birth date.

“It’s interesting. It’s not like earth-shattering or anything like that,"Dennis told The Arizona Republic. "My true parents, of course, were my adoptive parents. It would be almost impossible for me to think otherwise.”

Steve Dennis’ birth mother is still alive — and they’re meeting for the first time as adults later this month.

Through Steve Dennis’ half-sister, he found out his birth mother is still alive — and is 85 years old. Her memories of baby Steve are hazy — but according to Dennis, she was coerced by his father into abandoning the baby in a phone booth all those years ago.

He was born in a hospital, but then his father told his mother that he’d marry her if they could just abandon the baby. At some point during a drive from Kentucky that wound its way through Ohio, he physically removed baby Steve from their vehicle and left him in a phone booth.

A bread deliveryman found the baby a short time later, and the abandoned infant became a hot local story for some time, according to the Lancaster Eagle Gazette. Adoption offers came flooding in, as well. Not long after, the father disappeared and nobody in his biological family knows where he went.

Despite this amazing find, Steve Dennis may still not find out his real birth date.

The meeting is an amazing step forward — but Dennis told the Lancaster Eagle Gazette that his half-sister has said their mother simply doesn’t remember all the exact details.

Dennis said, "I’m not going to make a real big deal about this. I’ll just take whatever she gives me and leave it at that. I mean, you can’t hassle an 85-year-old woman —- so whatever she feels comfortable saying to me, I’ll take. It’s more than I had before."

For more great stories, head to INSIDER's homepage.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Cigna's CEO says that the problem with healthcare in America has nothing to do with employers

What causes human bodies to age? Here’s what scientists know about the biology behind growing old

$
0
0

Japan elderly woman

Everything grows old. As you age, you may notice an extra wrinkle on your forehead or lower energy levels.

To find out what's going on inside our bodies that causes these age-related changes and declines, the journal Cell assembled a group of researchers in 2013. That team, comprised of scientists studying different aspects of aging, reviewed all the existing literature on aging and wrote an overview.

"The Hallmarks of Aging," as their paper was called, summed up everything that happens in our bodies biologically as we get old, and categorized those processes into nine "hallmarks."

They are:

biological hallmarks of aging infographic

Here's what each of these hallmarks means and how they work.

SEE ALSO: These potential treatments for aging could unlock cures to a range of age-related illnesses, from cancer to heart disease

SEE ALSO: Animals that defy the rules of aging — like naked mole rats — could help scientists unravel the secrets to longevity

SEE ALSO: A scientist who studies aging reveals how restricting calories might offer protection against age-related diseases

Errors appear in DNA.

One type of damage that occurs with aging is that errors start to appear in our DNA. When DNA is replicated, the code might not always be copied correctly — parts could get misspelled, and sections could be accidentally inserted or deleted. These errors are not always caught by the mechanisms in our bodies that repair DNA. 

The genetic code is a cell's instruction manual, so as errors build up, they can wreck havoc. If the instructions become unclear or wrong over time, that could break down the cell and even make it turn cancerous. 

In old tissue, scientists have observed that many cells have a lot of accumulated genetic damage. If researchers can figure out how to improve the mechanism that repairs DNA, they could improve and possibly delay the aging process.



Gene expression goes awry.

Certain parts of your DNA are read and translated into physical traits. A group of proteins in your cells controls which genes ultimately get expressed. This process is called epigenetic moderation, and it's what ensures your skin cells are different from brain cells, even though they use the same set of DNA. 

But as we age, the proteins bound to DNA become looser and less accurate, and genes start to get expressed when they shouldn't be, or get silenced in error. This means some necessary proteins aren't being made, and harmful, unnecessary proteins are. For example, if an inadvertent change results in the silencing of a gene that helps suppress tumors, cells could uncontrollably grow into cancer. 

Scientists have found that reversing these types of errors in gene expression can improve some neurological effects of aging in mice, such as memory impairment.



Telomeres may shorten.

Telomeres are protective caps at the ends of each strand of DNA. Some scientists have compared them to the plastic tips of shoelaces that keep them from fraying. 

Some research suggests that every time cells divide, the tips of the chromosome become shorter. When the telomeres are lost, chromosomes become unstable and all kinds of problems arise. The most notable is that chromosomes can't replicate correctly, and end up fragmented or with extra parts that aren't supposed to be there. These abnormalities usually kill cells or make them dangerous.

Scientists have figured out how to increase levels of telomerase – an enzyme that can extend the length of telomeres — in mice, and a study suggested that can extend mice's lifespan. When they lowered levels of telomerase in mice, the mice lived shorter lives.



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

This 9/11 first responder had his family’s DNA tattooed into his skin so that he's never alone while undergoing chemotherapy

$
0
0

johnny walker everence

  • Johnny Walker was working for the NYPD on September 11, 2001. Today, he has stage 4 colon cancer. 
  • Scientists studying 9/11 survivors say they have higher rates of many kinds of cancer, including breast, cervical, colon, and lung.
  • Walker had his family's DNA mixed into red tattoo ink used on his arm to keep them close during treatment.
  • The DNA extraction technique was developed by a company called Everence, which can turn hair, ash, grass, sand or any other material into a microencapsulated powder that tattoo artists can mix into their inks.

 

Retired NYPD officer Johnny Walker is living with the toxic effects of responding to the World Trade Center attack on 9/11.

As a result of the time he spent in the dangerously dusty air that circulated "on the pile" after the twin towers fell, Walker said, he's now dealing with stage 4 colon cancer, the most advanced kind. He spent three full days at Ground Zero, helping with the recovery, cleaning up rubble, filling buckets, and even inadvertently digging out body parts, as he told Men's Health earlier this year.

Yet Walker maintains a wry sense of humor about his condition.

"That came back to bite me in the rear end," Walker said, referring to the intestinal cancer. "No pun intended." 

Many 9/11 rescue workers and survivors are plagued by tumors. According to the federal World Trade Center Health Program count, more than 9,000 firefighters, cops, office workers, and children who were living in or working around downtown Manhattan have high rates of many kinds of cancer. An estimated 420 9/11 survivors with cancer have died. 

This group has higher rates of roughly 70 types of cancer, including cervical, colon, and lung cancers. There have  even been 15 cases of breast cancer in men, as the New York Post reported. Many of these cancer cases are likely because these workers and survivors breathed in air contaminated with asbestos, lead, mercury and other toxic substances in the days and weeks following the attack. 

The bulk of the cancer cases, more than 7,500, are in first responders like Walker. His cancer has spread outside of his colon, and he has lymph node tumors pressing on internal organs near his digestive tract and pelvis. Sometimes, when he's undergoing chemotherapy treatment, he likes to feel the support of his wife, kids, or a close friend. 

That's when he touches a cluster of red inked tattoos on his left arm. 

The ink on Walker's arm is infused with a powder that contains his loved ones' genetic material. The powder, called Everence, is essentially a bunch of tiny, plastic containers that hold individual DNA strands. Each of the plastic enclosures is about one-tenth the size of a human hair.

"I'm stuck on a machine, all by myself in there, I actually rub my arm, and I'm not by myself," Walker told Business Insider. 

Putting your people in a tattoo

When a colleague told Walker about the possibility of putting genetic material into tattoos, he wasn't immediately enthusiastic about it. 

"My first reaction to hearing about it was, like, 'that's creepy, I don't know about this stuff,'" he said. 

But after he thought about the idea a little more, Walker decided he wanted to be able to take his family with him wherever he went from now on.

"Wait a second," he said, "I have cancer, and there's a possibility that I might not be here that much longer." 

In the spring, Walker inserted DNA from his wife, son, daughter, and a fellow NYPD officer into tattoos. His tattoo artist mixed the Everence powder into the red ink. Later, Walker added some tattoo chains to connect the tattoos.

everence DNA tattoos

"It's something tangible, something I can physically touch," he said.

Here are the tattoos Walker has with Everence powder:

911_dna_tattoo skitch

Walker said the drawings are good luck talismans like the ones the Knights Templar used to carry. Each represents something different: health, protection, or brotherhood.

A tattoo of a blade and chalice, Walker said, "is symbolic of perfect love and perfect trust."That's where he put DNA from his wife.

"No matter where I go in this world, if life takes me somewhere else, I'm going to have them with me," he said.

johnny_walker_everence

How Everence powder works 

The week-long process for creating Everence dust was developed by chemist Edith Mathiowitz at Brown University and tested by Bruce Klitzman, who researches medical device implants at Duke University.

The fine, silvery powder is made from a polymer called PMMA (poly-methyl methacrylate), which you might know better in its acrylic glass form, Plexiglas. Each grain of the powder acts as a tiny plastic container that holds one strand of extracted DNA, ash, or hair. The coating is sterile and won't erode over time, so it sits under a person's skin forever. 

everence

Mathiowitz and Klitzman assert that the powder is clean and safe for implantation. 

"It’s a medical-grade material that is being used all over the world for many therapeutic applications," Mathiowitz said in a video on Everence's site.

Everence co-founder Patrick Duffy said more than 250 people have Everence tattoos. The powder costs $350.

The process Duffy uses to package DNA into tiny capsules also allows clients to add non-human materials into their tattoo if they want. Those materials get milled into an ultra-fine powder, then encapsulated in the same plastic polymer coating. 

Everence has created tiny particles of blades of stadium grass, Harley Davidson motorcycle shards, and bits of volcanic rocks to put into Everence powder.

"Ultimately, you could really put anything that you imagine into your tattoos," Duffy said.

For people who aren't fans of tattoos, the powder can even be mixed into a clear, ink-free solution, then invisibly injected into the skin. It's the same process, sans ink, but the powder still sits in you forever. 

SEE ALSO: A 77-year-old doctor diagnosed himself with a deadly lung problem while climbing Everest — here's how he survived

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Here's what has to happen under your skin to permanently remove a tattoo

I took the $99 AncestryDNA genetic test — here's what the process is like and what you can expect from the service

$
0
0

The Insider Picks team writes about stuff we think you'll like. Business Insider has affiliate partnerships, so we get a share of the revenue from your purchase.

22728776_10154924453681630_1470709296863230664_n

  • If you're thinking of taking a genetic test, you're probably considering AncestryDNA, which is the most popular because it offers twice the geographic detail than others and a database of 10 million+ users.
  • I took the AncestryDNA test to show what the process is like, and what you can expect from the service.
  • You can take one for yourself by picking up a $99 test on Amazon or AncestryDNA.

Whether it's to finally settle the score on the elusive 3% Italian ancestry your father claims, to learn more about your health and history, or to connect with relatives across the globe, genetic tests are an increasingly popular tool.

The trend isn't surprising. If every human is their own inimitable genetic snowflake, and there are billions upon billions of unique human snowflakes in our history on earth, it's no great wonder that people want to unlock the details of who they are when given the chance. From the Stone Age to mapping our genome across the globe, an impossibility is now possible with $99 and access to the internet. 

There are practical concerns that drive millions to genetic tests — like health and long-lost family — but it seems the biggest incentive is a basic curiosity about who we are, and how we relate to other people.

Some tests can show you how much of your history can be traced back to Neanderthals. Others can connect you to a second cousin in Lithuania you never knew existed.

Of the tests out there, AncestryDNA is the #1 consumer option according to a company report. It is autosomal (meaning it traces all of your family lines, rather than just your paternal or maternal), and provides the most comprehensive look into your ancestry. The latter is largely due to its community of 10 million+ users, the industry’s largest DNA reference panel, and offering two times more geographic detail than other tests.

A common concern for prospective genetic test users is privacy. At a baseline, AncestryDNA does not claim ownership rights over any DNA submitted for testing, so you own your DNA. If you want more information, you should check out their Privacy Center

Recently, I took my own AncestryDNA test. Here's what the process looks like:

Order a kit and send your saliva sample to the lab in a prepaid package.

Order an AncestryDNA kit from Amazon or AncestryDNA. When it arrives, follow the instructions inside to fill a small vial (included) with about a teaspoon of saliva. 

Then, return your saliva sample to the lab in a prepaid package. 

Your test results should show up 6-8 weeks from the time that the lab receives your DNA sample. But make sure to remember you have to activate your DNA kit online so it can begin processing.



After 6-8 weeks, your results will show up online. Ancestry calculates your ethnicity and breaks it down into percentages and infographics.

When your results come in, you'll see a map like this with your ethnicity broken down into percentages. Splotches on the map show the scope and concentration of your specific DNA.

In the lab, Ancestry uses its advanced micro-array technology to detect thousands of your DNA markers and genes, and then maps them for you to easily reference (pictured above). 

Because each child gets a unique concoction of DNA from their mother and father, you may find that you got slightly more Irish genes than your brother, who may have received more of the Italian genes. If just one sibling takes the test, you'll get a great overview of your family history, but your own individual breakdown will vary. 

As the site's algorithm improves (and its DNA reference panel grows), you may see your results grow more precise with time. 



AncestryDNA plots your DNA on a world map with emphasis on the regions where your DNA is highly concentrated. You can click on them to see your results narrowed to localized sections. You might also see the option to view the DNA matches of potential relatives on the site for that region.

Your Ancestry map plots where in the world your DNA is from, with a higher concentration of color and tighter circles on the regions you are most deeply linked to. 

You can click on any ethnicity percentage for a zoomed-in look at the regions your DNA is from. For me, my higher percentages correlated with the most specific information, allowing me to narrow my results from "Ireland and Scotland" down to Munster, Ireland and then down to a more localized region of Southern Ireland. The sections enclosed by dotted lines provide your "deep dives" and the greatest wealth of information.

When I clicked on the dotted areas and zoned in on my map's most specific results, AncestryDNA also gave me the option to see the 1,000+ DNA Matches on the site that shared this region of Southern Ireland. Among them, I found the names of siblings and other relatives I knew had taken the genetic test, and possible 4th, 6th, and so on cousins I didn't know. 

Not all of my ethnicity percentages showed specifics aside from the general region my DNA is from, but the site is collaborative, and as you build out your Ancestry trees, the more personalized this overview will become. 



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

Suspected serial 'NorCal rapist' arrested in California thanks to a DNA match on a genealogy website — just like the Golden State Killer

$
0
0

norcal rapist wide thumbnail

  • Roy Charles Waller, 58, was arrested on Thursday for allegedly carrying out 10 sexual assaults in Northern California from 1991 to 2006.
  • Investigators identified Waller by uploading the suspect's DNA profile to a genealogy website, the same method used to catch the Golden State Killer less than six months ago.
  • Waller, who is married and worked at UC Berkeley, is being held on charges of rape, oral copulation by force, and penetration by a foreign object.

Police in Sacramento, California believe they have finally identified the "NorCal rapist" who menaced the region for more than a decade, allegedly sexually assaulting at least 10 women between 1991 and 2006.

At a press conference on Friday, officials said they had identified Roy Charles Waller thanks to DNA left behind at the scenes of some of the crimes.

They uploaded that DNA profile to an open-source genealogy website called GEDMatch, and the profile matched with one of the 58-year-old's relatives.

From there, they constructed a family tree and narrowed down the potential suspects to Waller, who was the right age and weight, had lived in the areas where the attacks happened, and owned the same guns as those the serial rapist used.

It was the same tactic authorities used to identify suspected Golden State Killer Joseph James DeAngelo, 72, nearly five months ago.

After arresting DeAngelo, one of the investigators who helped break the case, Paul Holes, was invited to speak to Sacramento Police about the process.

"The NorCal rapist was brought up as the No. 1 priority at the time," Holes told the Mercury News.

Identifying Waller and arresting him took only a little more than a week, officials said.

At the press conference on Friday, they said once they identified him as their primary suspect, they collected DNA samples from two "discarded items of trash" outside his house. Those DNA samples came back as a match for samples collected from the NorCal rapist's most recent assault, in October 2006.

Waller was arrested without incident Thursday morning, as he arrived for work.

"Genealogy 10 days ago led us very quickly to this individual," Sacramento County District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert said at the press conference. "It was probably record-setting how quickly Mr. Waller was identified as the person we were looking for."

The common thread

roy waller map

Authorities first realized they were looking for a serial rapist in 2006, when investigators found the same DNA left behind at the scene of 10 different sexual assaults in the region.

The suspect was given the name of the "NorCal rapist" and investigators painted a grim picture of his habits.

In almost all of the crimes, the suspect broke into a woman's home at night, tied her up, and then repeatedly raped her.

In one especially heinous incident, police said the rapist wore a skeleton mask and posed as a trick-or-treater on Halloween night 1996 to gain entrance to one of his victim's homes.

Holes said the suspect was "very evidence conscious," cleaning up before he left the crime scenes so as not to leave behind evidence that could be tied back to him.

But he didn't catch everything. One of the biggest breaks that investigators got was in 1997, when one of the victims momentarily untied herself and was able to stab her rapist with a pair of scissors, drawing blood.

"For 27 years, there has been one common thread — his DNA," Schubert said on Friday. "I have often said in my career that DNA is the silent witness to the truth. For 27 years, that truth was not known, until now."

A quiet man

Waller has reportedly worked since 1992 at UC Berkeley as a safety specialist, training employees how to safely operate forklifts and other machinery at the campus.

The school said in a statement that it's not believed Waller raped anyone on campus, but that they are reviewing their unsolved sexual assaults.

Neighbors in Benicia, where Waller lived with his wife, were shocked to learn of his arrest. They told the Sacramento Bee that the couple was friendly, but mostly kept to themselves. Waller is said to have spent his weekends toying around with cars and motorcycles.

One neighbor, Anne Crawford, said she never saw kids, pets, or visitors at the couple's home.

A victim's relief

Following Waller's arrest, his first victim spoke out to the press about the relief she felt to finally see her attacker behind bars.

Nicole Earnest Payte was 21 years old in 1991 when the NorCal rapist broke into her Rohnert Park home and raped her.

"I woke up to a masked man with arms around me and a gun to my head," she recalled to KGO.

Payte, who is now a married mother, says she has had a "wonderful life" and that "He has not destroyed my life."

But she became emotional when speaking about what it means to see him identified after nearly three decades.

"I don't cry a lot about this. I've been waiting for this for a long time," she said. "It's interesting, when I saw his face, I felt nothing, numb."

Payte said she hopes to testify at his trial to "tell the world what he did."

Waller is being held at the Sacramento County Jail without bond on three felony charges of rape, forced oral copulation, and penetration by a foreign object.

The rape charges carry a special enhancement since police say he used a gun, which means that if he's convicted, he could spend the rest of his life in jail.

Waller's due to appear in court for an arraignment Monday afternoon.

Police are investigating whether there could be more victims. A designated tip line has been set up at 916-808-1773.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 3 compelling reasons why we haven't found aliens yet

A DNA test offered by Albertsons claims to tell you which antidepressant is best for you, but scientists say it’s not worth the money

$
0
0

alone sad depressed sea

  • Several companies make DNA tests that claim to tell you how well you'll respond to certain antidepressants based on your genetic profile.
  • Two personalized medicine companies — Assurex and Genomind — offer some of the most popular tests and work with physicians and pharmacists to provide them to patients.
  • A chain of Albertsons pharmacies in Chicago, Philadelphia, and Boise is running a pilot program in which pharmacists can offer the Genomind test.
  • Silicon Valley genetics testing startup Color Genomics recently began offering a similar test as part of its services.
  • The costs of the tests range from $250 to $750, but some scientists say it's not worth the money. 

Around the time that 26-year-old Courtney Luk got in line at the pharmacy to pick up her 25th depression medication, she decided she'd had enough.

Over the previous two years, Luk had been prescribed everything from Klonopin to Xanax to treat the anxiety and depression she'd experienced since adolescence. Nothing seemed to do the trick. One medication would make her feel numb; others seemed to make her symptoms worse.

Then a psychiatrist suggested she try a genetic test that could provide guidance about which drug Luk should try next. They swabbed the inside of Luk's cheek for a spit sample and sent it off to get tested.

Using DNA testing to determine how well a given depression medication will work with a patient's genetic makeup is becoming a popular approach. More than 750,000 people have taken one such test, called GeneSight, which is made by personalized medicine company Assurex, according to its website. A network of 28 Albertsons pharmacies offers a similar test made by a company called Genomind as part of a pilot program. And just last month, Silicon Valley genetics testing startup Color Genomics began offering a test as part of its $250 kits.

But some scientists say the tests have limited utility.

That's because they doesn't tell providers which specific medication is best to prescribe patients, according to Alan Schatzberg, a Stanford University psychiatrist and the director of the Stanford Mood Disorders Center. And Cristina Cusin, a Harvard psychiatrist, said the test won't give helpful results to patients who take more than one medication.

Plus, the tests may give conflicting results to the same patient for the same medication, according to a peer-reviewed analysis of four different gene tests published this summer.

A pricey test with a lofty goal

DNA Swab

Since adolescence, Luk had experienced debilitating anxiety that sometimes turned into panic attacks, along with mood swings and depression that sometimes led her to contemplate taking her own life. Despite trying more than two dozen different medications, Luk and her psychiatrists had yet to come up with a combination of drugs that significantly lifted her mood without contributing to her anxiety.

Luk had heard of genetics tests for antidepressants before, but previously declined to take one since she couldn't afford the $750 price tag.

But when a psychiatrist suggested a test she could get for free through insurance, a kit from Genomind called the Genecept Assay, Luk said yes. The test appealed to her as a potential way to eliminate the trial-and-error process of starting a new drug and waiting — sometimes up to six weeks, the standard for most antidepressants — to see if it worked.

"I don't feel like my medications right now are working optimally, and I was hoping to learn if there's a cocktail of medications that would do that," Luk said.

Her psychiatrist told her the test might show them what to do next. Perhaps they'd learn that one medication wasn't right for her body and could be replaced with a different drug. But when the results came in, they were murkier than Luk anticipated.

Her report listed all the antidepressants she'd taken along with several she'd yet to try. Each got a colored check mark: red checks suggested Luk would likely have negative reactions to a drug, green checks suggested no negative reactions, and orange checks indicated something in between.

Next to a popular antidepressant called Celexa, for example, Luk's test showed an orange check mark and said, "increased risk for adverse events or poor response." That meant that because of the way her body processed the drug, Luk was more likely than the average person to experience negative side effects or see no positive results.

Sure enough, Luk recalled that when she'd taken Celexa several years earlier, she had experienced painful bruising across her arms and legs.

But another drug Luk had recently begun taking, called Topamax, carried a green check and said "use as directed — no known gene-drug interactions." Despite taking that medication for several weeks, however, Luk said she hadn't experienced any change in her symptoms.

So she went back to trial and error.

Daniel Dowd, Genomind's vice president of medical affairs, acknowledged that some patients may read too much into the test.

"I think patients do tend to think, ‘OK, this is going say exactly what this specific drug is going to do for me,' and that's not what this test is," Dowd told Business Insider. "Like any other branch of medicine, [the test] provides an estimation of risk."

Genomind funded a 2018 study of its test that analyzed patient spending in the six-month period following use of the test. The authors — one of whom sits on Genomind's scientific advisory board — compared roughly 800 people with mood and anxiety disorders who took the test with nearly 3,000 people who didn’t take it. They found that people who took the test spent nearly $2,000 less on healthcare on average, mostly because they visited ERs and hospitals less frequently in the months following the test than people who didn't take it.

The researchers wrote that it could represent “a promising strategy to reduce costs” in people with depression and anxiety.  

To Dowd, the finding was a big endorsement of the test.

"If we can get this test embedded in the healthcare record, that could mean a big cost savings," he said.

Who the test may — and may not — help

Once you swallow a pill, various genes control how your body will break it down. One gene in particular, called CYP2D6, is one of the most closely studied. Some people have faulty or abnormal copies of that gene, meaning they don't process drugs like antidepressants as they should. That increases the chances that someone could have an adverse reaction like bruising or not respond to a medication at all.

The gene tests are designed to assess whether a patient is likely to have a negative outcome on any common antidepressants. In theory, that would help patients and their providers narrow down the list of potential medications to try.

"In these cases, I think there is clear evidence" for using a gene test, Michelle Whirl-Carrillo, a senior research scientist at the Stanford University School of Medicine, told the author of an article published by the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA)

But Schatzberg, the Stanford psychiatrist, said a narrower list is not what his patients need.

"What’s really needed is a test that says, ‘You have this profile, these are the two drugs you need to use.’ That’s what’s missing," he said.

Instead, the tests merely tell him if someone's body doesn't process a drug properly — a conclusion they'd reach anyway after trial and error.

"I don't necessarily need to know up front if a person is a poor drug metabolizer. I need to know which specific drug to use where I will get the positive effect with less side effect burden," Schatzberg said. "These tests don't do that.”

prescription-pills-medicine-in-hand

Cusin, the Harvard psychiatrist, specializes in treating people with severe depression. She agreed with Schatzberg.

"I don't think psychiatrists get much information about the costs and benefits or much predictive value for this type of test," she said.

Cusin added that she doesn't think the test helps in cases where people are taking multiple medications or when patients have a history of failing to respond to medications. Plus, she said, a recent study made her hesitant to use the tests in her own practice.

That study found major inconsistencies among four different gene tests (including Genomind’s). In roughly one out of five cases, the authors said, different tests gave conflicting advice to the same patient.

“The level of disagreement in medication recommendations … indicates that these tests cannot be assumed to be equivalent or interchangeable,” the researchers wrote.

‘I jumped on it because I was tired of trial and error'

pharmacy-prescription-medication-pillsUnlike Luk, Allyson Byers, a 27-year-old in Los Angeles, said taking a genetic test saved her time in the quest to find the right medication.

Byers took Assurex's GeneSight test after trying several drugs for her depression. 

"I jumped on it because I was tired of trial and error," she told Business Insider.

Byers said she paid $60 for the test after talking with her therapist and an Assurex representative (though she initially received a bill for several hundred dollars).

Her results weren't perfect. Byers had been taking the antidepressant Zoloft for nine months, but she experienced several negative side effects, including weight gain. On the Assurex test, however, Zoloft was green-lit.

"When the results came back, I was questioning myself and thinking, ‘Did I make that all up? Did I really gain weight?'"

But the test also suggested another medication called Pristiq that Byers had not previously taken, she said. So Byers' therapist suggested they try that instead of Zoloft. Several weeks later, Byers said she felt better — and thanked the test for helping her find a different medication.

"I've had to go up in dose a couple times, but I feel like I've finally found the right dose," she said. For her, the test was "just another tool to help narrow things down."

Coming to a pharmacy near you?

AlbertsonsIncreasingly, some patients are learning about genetics tests for antidepressants from their pharmacist instead of a psychiatrist.

In Chicago, Boise, and Philadelphia, 28 Albertsons drug stores are offering the Genomind test, according to Kimberly Hecht, a patient care services coordinator with Albertsons who leads the project.

She told Business Insider that mental health became a focus at the pharmacies she oversees when they began offering medications for drug addiction. Plus, because Albertsons' pharmacies are open longer and on more days of the week than others nearby, they sometimes function as a default mental health provider, Hecht said.

"It just made sense with what we were offering and also because of our position in the community," Jennifer Rapley, a marketing manager with Albertsons who works closely with Hecht, told Business Insider.

The project is currently in a pilot phase, but Genomind hopes to eventually offer its gene test in all 1,760 Albertsons-owned pharmacies throughout the country, JAMA reported this month.

But some components of the Albertsons program — such as how pharmacists determine whether a patient is a good candidate for the test and how it evaluates whether the results are effective — remain hazy.

For example, a patient does not have to have a history of using antidepressants to be offered the test, Hecht said.

"Typically it's going to be patients who’ve tried a couple different things and it’s not working, but we kind of leave it up to our pharmacists’ professional judgment," she said.

That makes Schatzberg wary. 

"I think it presents real problems," he said. "It’s practicing a level of medicine and offering a test where it’s not clear whether and how it should be used. It’s hard for me to believe that’s a good idea."

The future of genetic testing for depression

Last month, Silicon Valley genetics testing startup Color Genomics began offering a test for antidepressants as a component of its DNA tests, which screen for gene variations linked to cancer and heart disease. Color's service includes a professional genetics counselor as well as a clinical pharmacist who walk a patient through their results.

Othman Laraki, the company's founder and CEO, told Business Insider that he sees the new test in a similar light to Color's cancer test, which the company began offering in 2013.

"Like we saw with cancer, it’s definitely a moving target, it’s definitely still early, and there’s still a lot of uncertainty," Laraki said. "But there’s enough support and enough scientific validity where it makes us feel comfortable enough to offer it."

Hecht, the Albertsons coordinator, agreed.

"These types of tests really are the future and have the potential to really help people," she said.

But for some patients, that future may not have arrived yet.

"After 25 different drugs, I may just be one of those people whose bodies doesn't respond to medication," Luk said. "In the end, it's still trial and error, but it's a little bit more of a targeted trial and error — a little bit more of an educated guess."

SEE ALSO: 'This test is garbage': Experts and former employees allege that a Silicon Valley startup gives bogus 'cellular ages' based on a flawed blood test

DON'T MISS: A controversial startup that charges $8,000 to fill your veins with young blood is opening its first clinic

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Scientists say combining these 2 activities could be an effective way to fight depression

Elizabeth Warren releases DNA test 'strongly' supporting claims of Native American ancestry in rebuke to Trump

$
0
0

Elizabeth Warren

  • Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat, on Monday released the findings of a DNA test that a researcher said "strongly support" her claims of Native American ancestry.
  • President Donald Trump has used Warren's claims to mock and undermine her, nicknaming her "Pocahontas."
  • He said in July that he would donate $1 million to a charity of Warren's choice if a DNA test found she had Native American heritage.
  • On Monday morning, Trump denied ever offering the money.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat, on Monday released the findings of a DNA test that a report said "strongly support" her claim of Native American ancestry, a claim on which President Donald Trump has previously seized to mock and undermine her.

Trump said at a July rally that he would give $1 million to a charity of Warren's choice if a DNA test found that the senator had Native American heritage.

"I have a feeling she will say no," Trump said to cheers from the crowd.

Warren's Senate reelection campaign has now created a website and released a five-minute video that features her family in Oklahoma, where she was born and raised, and Carlos Bustamante, the Stanford University professor who conducted the DNA test.

In the video, Bustamante says the facts suggest Warren "absolutely" had a Native American ancestor between six and 10 generations ago; the report describing the test's results says they "strongly support" that conclusion.

The video also features several of Warren's former academic colleagues pushing back on another line of attack from Trump and his allies, that Warren used her claim of Native American ancestry to advance her legal and political career. The president often sarcastically refers to the senator as "Pocahontas," which many consider a racist insult.

In the video, Warren's former colleagues say her ethnicity was not considered when they hired her to teach at Harvard Law School, the University of Houston, University of Pennsylvania Law School, and UT Austin School of Law.

"The people who recruited Elizabeth to her teaching jobs, including Ronald Reagan's former solicitor general, all confirm: they hired her because she was an award-winning legal scholar and professor and they were unaware of her family's heritage,"the website says.

The senator asked Trump to direct his $1 million donation to the Indigenous Women's Resource Center, a nonprofit group that works to protect Native American women and their children from violence.

But on Monday morning, Trump denied ever offering Warren money in exchange for such test results.

"I didn't say that — you better read it again," he told a gaggle of reporters outside the White House.

The White House counselor, Kellyanne Conway, dismissed the DNA test on Monday, telling CNN it "really doesn't interest me."

This effort is the most comprehensive the senator has undertaken to defend and shed light on her heritage. She said she's out not simply out to clear her name but to condemn racist attacks on Native Americans.

"Trump can say whatever he wants about me," Warren says in the video. "But mocking Native Americans or any group in order to try to get at me — that's not what America stands for."

The public-relations campaign has reignited speculation that Warren is preparing for a 2020 presidential bid. Warren is already a national leader of the progressive left wing of the Democratic Party, has a strong fundraising operation, and is poised to win reelection to the Senate in a landslide next month.

During a September event in Holyoke, Massachusetts, she gave her clearest indication yet that she would run in 2020.

"It's time for women to go to Washington and fix our broken government, and that includes a woman at the top. So here's what I promise: After November 6, I will take a hard look at running for president,"she said to an extended standing ovation.

But the senator must also contend with what her constituents want her to do. A recent poll in Warren's home state found that a majority of Massachusetts voters didn't want her to run for the presidency, despite approving of her work in the Senate.

SEE ALSO: 7 Democratic women to watch in 2020

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Inside the Trump 'MAGA' hat factory

Trump slams Elizabeth Warren's Native American heritage story as 'fraud against the American public'

$
0
0

elizabeth warren

  • Donald Trump slammed Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren for claiming Native American heritage, saying she defrauded the public by pretending to belong to another ethnicity. 
  • On Monday, Warren released the results of a DNA test that suggested she was between 1/32nd and 1/512th Native American. 
  • Members of the Cherokee Nation, and Warren's own party, attacked her use of a DNA test to prove ancestry, which doesn't hold up to scientific scrutiny.
  • But Trump went too far by saying Harvard wouldn't have accepted Warren without her claim to be a Native, as The Boston Globe reported in September.

President Donald Trump slammed Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren for claiming to be a Native American with a tweet on Tuesday which said she defrauded the public by pretending to belong to another ethnicity. 

On Monday, Warren released the results of a DNA test that suggested she was between 1/32nd and 1/512th Native American. Trump has consistently attacked her for claiming to have Cherokee heritage while she was a professor at Harvard, often calling her "Pocahontas" as an insult. 

She also created a website and released a five-minute video that features her family in Oklahoma, where she was born and raised, alongside the Stanford University professor who conducted the DNA test as part of her Senate reelection campaign.

However, other scientists have been quick to point out that DNA tests can't prove ancestry. Additionally, nearly all European-Americans with long enough family lines in the US have some trace amount of Native American DNA.

"Now that her claims of being of Indian heritage have turned out to be a scam and a lie, Elizabeth Warren should apologize for perpetrating this fraud against the American Public. Harvard called her 'a person of color' (amazing con), and would not have taken her otherwise!" Trump tweeted.

While Warren's claim has not been definitively disproven, her DNA press blitz appeared to backfire heavily. 

Warren initially appeared triumphant and challenged Trump to make good on his July promise of donating $1 million to a charity of Warren's choice if a DNA test found that the senator had Native American heritage.

But Native Americans and her own party quickly turned on her. 

David Axelrod, former President Barack Obama's strategist tweeted: "Pretty extraordinary video to surface even before you enter the race. It says: 1) @SenWarren is 100% running. 2 ) She thinks this Pocahontas crap is a potential problem. 3) She wants to dispose of it now, lest she be Birtherized. The risk I’m sure she considered? This elevates it."

Jim Messina, former President Barack Obama's 2012 campaign manager, tweeted:  "Argue the substance all you want, but why 22 days before a crucial election where we MUST win house and senate to save America, why did @SenWarren have to do her announcement now? Why can't Dems ever stay focused???" 

Cherokee Nation Secretary of State Chuck Hoskin Jr. called the test cited by Warren's report "useless" in determining tribal citizenship. He alleged she was "undermining tribal interests" with her "continued claims of tribal heritage."

"A DNA test is useless to determine tribal citizenship. Current DNA tests do not even distinguish whether a person's ancestors were indigenous to North or South America,"Hoskin said in a statement.

However, Trump's attack on Warren appeared to go too far and become factually wrong when he stated that Harvard "would not have taken" her but for her claims to Native heritage.

The Boston Globe reported in September tha Harvard never considered Warren a Native American during the application process in the 1990s.

Warren has long been an outspoken Trump critic and remains a much-discussed potential presidential candidate for the Democrats in 2020.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Inside the Trump 'MAGA' hat factory

23andMe opened a fake house in NYC where you can meet your genes — take a look inside

$
0
0

23andMe Meet Your Genes

It's been three years since 23andMe, a consumer genetics company, relaunched a new test that passed the scrutiny of the Food and Drug Administration and told you everything from how much DNA you share with our Neanderthal ancestors to how much caffeine you likely consume.

But in addition to the ancestry data, it also gives you details on certain genetic variants that can increase your likelihood of developing certain diseases. Starting in March, 23andMe got the go-ahead for a breast cancer test that tells users whether they have certain mutations related to the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes.

Consumer genetics tests like 23andMe have been gaining in popularity. Over Thanksgiving weekend last year alone, shoppers bought 1.5 million of 23andMe rival AncestryDNA's kits. 

In October, 23andMe opened up an interactive pop-up exhibition in the middle of Manhattan to help consumers visualize what their tests can do and better understand the data they might receive if they choose to take the test. It's part of the company's new ad campaign aimed at highlighting the information you can glean from a report beyond ancestry. 

The limited-time exhibit was open to the public last weekend. In case you missed it, here's what it was like to visit. 

SEE ALSO: I revisited my 23andMe results that can now tell whether you may have an increased risk of cancer — here's what it was like

SEE ALSO: Mount Sinai teamed up with the designers who created projects for Nike and Beyonce to build a futuristic, new clinic — and it's reimagining how healthcare is delivered

Walking in, we saw a series of colorful stalls arranged in a style that you would typically see in a modern art museum.



The first thing you see is a large poster that teaches you what DNA is and what it can tell you about yourself.



Each stall is fashioned after one specific gene that correlates to an array of traits. The first bright orange stall, detailing a bedroom, highlights the BTBD9 gene, which is associated with sleep-related movements.



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

Native American geneticists explain what Elizabeth Warren's DNA test really means

$
0
0

DNA

  • Geneticists Krystal Tsosie and Matthew Anderson share their thoughts on Senator Elizabeth Warren's recent DNA test, which she claims proves her Native American ancestry.
  • Since Senator Warren's DNA was tested with samples from Indigenous individuals in Central and South America, it doesn't necessarily mean that she had a Native American ancestor, according to Tsosie and Anderson.
  • The samples from Indigenous individuals were also from the 1000 Genomes Project, which has been questioned for its lack of transparency and possible exploitation of Indigenous and Native American communities.
  • Tsosie and Anderson are concerned that this instance may be another example of "Indian" blood quantification that could be used as a political ploy.

Dr. Carlos Bustamante, a prominent population geneticist, recently concluded that Senator Elizabeth Warren had “a Native American ancestor.” While geneticists agree on the validityof the test, which is based on established statistical models of DNA inheritance, we as two Native American geneticists find the interpretation to be problematic.

The reasons have to do with what we see as Warren’s motives, the genetic variants informing the comparison and overall concerns Native Americans have with genetic testing.

Because Bustamante used Indigenous individuals from Central and South America as a reference group to compare Warren’s DNA, we believe he should have stated only that Warren potentially had an “Indigenous” ancestor 6-10 generations ago, not conclusively a “Native American” one. The distinction might seem hypercritical to most, but to the sovereign tribal nations of the United States it’s an important one.

Genetic controversies

dna test

Our concern stems from the historical power imbalances around how genetic material has been collected.

Bustamante’s analysis utilized genetic data collected from Indigenous individuals as part of the 1000 Genomes Project. The project’s broad goal was to catalog genetic data from worldwide populations to advance knowledge of human diversity.

For Indigenous groups in the U.S. and globally, this approach has always been a concern. There is a cultural disconnect between Indigenous origin stories and the practice of tracing human origins through DNA.

Adding to this, earlier ventures of cataloging Indigenous genetic variants, such as the Human Genome Diversity Project and Genographic Project, were denounced by the United Nations and Indigenous nations worldwide for a lack of engagement and transparency. The control and collection of genomic information from marginalized Indigenous groups led to concerns that such information could be used for commercial gain and opened the projects to accusations of exploitation. A declaration in 2007 was passed calling for the cessation of genomic studies collecting Indigenous biomarkers.

dna testing

While the 1000 Genomes Project learned from its predecessors and adopted more extensive consent procedures, it and other large-scale ancestry projects publicly disclose the genomic information they collect, which is meant to advance research. But Indigenous groups’ concerns about having commercial companies profit from their genetic material without their inclusion has endured. Data from the 1000 Genomes Project and Human Genome Diversity Project, for instance, are used to inform percent Native American ancestry estimates as advertised by direct-to-consumer tests 23andMe and AncestryDNA, the latter of which posted a billion dollars in revenue in 2017.

Because of this and other recent genetic controversies impacting Indigenous communities, Native Americans in the U.S. have been wary of participating in genomics research. Some tribes, like the Navajo Nation, have long-standing moratoriums on genetics research. As such, Native American individuals constitute the lowest ethnic or minority group recruited into genomic studies. (We point to an ethical framework for engaging Indigenous communities that can address these concerns, developed by Indigenous geneticists.)

Genetic testing principles

elizabeth warren

For these reasons, Bustamante could not use U.S. tribal groups in his analyses of Warren’s DNA. But how does this affect the interpretation?

These studies compare the genetic variants that an individual possesses to a reference group. In Bustamante’s analysis, he used 37 Indigenous individuals from Mexico, Peru and Colombia. Indigenous communities and nations across both continents exchanged goods, migrated and intermarried, and can be culturally linked. But considering that Indigenous peoples of Central and South American have important different population and genetic histories from tribes of the U.S., one can see that he utilized a proxy.

Importantly, most genetic tests sample only a subset of a person’s DNA at certain locations, or loci, on a person’s chromosomes. Often, a set of markers across a genomic region are passed onto progeny with other regions due to physical proximity on the DNA, although this is not the case for all parts of the genome. Statistics are then used to determine which loci are more likely to be co-inherited with others.

Although these tests utilize our best understandings of genetics and statistics, they are still predictions. And statements of statistical inferences should be in respect to the reference group sampled. So the conclusion, at its most conservative, is that Warren has a high statistical probability that her DNA points to an Indigenous ancestor.

Demonstrating ancestry

cherokee

Warren claimed that her DNA test result corroborates family lore of a certain Cherokee ancestor but genealogical records show “no proof” that her great-great-grandmother was part Cherokee. Thus, Warren has not demonstrated a direct lineal descent from an enrolled tribal member, a requirement for citizenship by all three of the federally recognized Cherokee tribes. Even further, the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma denounced DNA tests as insufficient for determining lineage and “inappropriate.”

There are hundreds of thousands of Americans who self-identify as Cherokee or claim to have a Cherokee ancestor, and finding evidence can be difficult.

Determining which tribal census record – for instance, the Dawes Roll or 1924 Baker Rollused by the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma and Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, respectively, for enrollment – requires specific knowledge of the ancestor in question. Even though the Dawes Roll has an extensive record of past enrollees, as Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma tribal member McKalee Steen told one of us (Tsosie), “there were a lot of people [who] were too afraid to sign it and now their descendants have no way of knowing or showing that they are a descendant of a tribal member.” These concerns lasted well into the mid-20th century in Oklahoma, where Sen. Warren was raised.

elizabeth warren

Throughout this, Warren has stated that she understands the “distinction between citizenship and ancestry” and she does not seek tribal enrollment in the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma. But even with the backlash by Native Americans, she still defends her decision to release her DNA test results. Her response, “I have an election,” and her immediate call to a bet with President Trump illuminates her political motives in trying to demonstrate a Native American ancestry.

Our concerns about DNA ancestry

dna

From our perspective, Warren has taken a complex and harmful history of “Indian” blood quantification – a system we see as meant to dilute our existence – and reduced it to a political ploy. As such, we ultimately see the test is about her own political gain.

In fact, we wish to be excluded from any conversation that conflates DNA ancestry with Indigenous or Native American identity. And the distinction is an important one – “Native American” is not just an ethnic term but it is a cultural and political designation. Tribal sovereignty, the ability to self-govern, is constructed on a special nation-to-nation relationship with the federal government and requires the ability to determine citizenship. To have this biologically reified and reduced to biomarkers from a broad definition of Indigenous peoples that each have their own histories is to threaten the very sovereign status that enables Native American cultural and traditional ways of living.

Visit INSIDER's homepage for more.

SEE ALSO: Inside the unconventional high school science class where students work to cure diseases instead of take tests and do homework

FOLLOW US: INSIDER is on Facebook

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Medical breakthroughs we will see in the next 50 years

DNA editing on-the-cheap is the promise of Synthego, which just raised $110 million from Peter Thiel and other investors

$
0
0

tubes

  • Synthego, a Silicon Valley genome-engineering startup founded by former SpaceX engineers, sells ready-to-use kits that let people experiment with the cutting-edge gene-editing tool Crispr.
  • On Tuesday, Synthego received $110 million from Peter Thiel's Founders Fund and two other Silicon Valley venture firms, bringing the company's total funding to $160 million.
  • Crispr holds massive promise for a field known as gene therapy, which involves modifying someone's DNA to treat a genetic disease.
  • Synthego sells its Crispr kits primarily to researchers in roughly 50 countries. In the US, clients include the Mayo Clinic and two high-profile labs at Stanford and the University of California at Berkeley.

On Tuesday, a little-known startup founded by two former SpaceX engineers became one of the best-funded life-science startups using the blockbuster gene-editing tool Crispr for genome engineering.

Called Synthego, the company sells easy-to-use Crispr kits to scientists, who use the tool to perform tasks as varied as creating designer crops and finding new cures for rare diseases.

Recently, the company has been focusing on diseases, with an emphasis on how Synthego could help make its tools more useful and accessible to researchers aiming to create a revolutionary new class of treatments known as gene therapy.

Despite decades of being touted as having the potential to cure dozens of diseases, gene therapies remain difficult to access. Few have been approved by federal regulators; those that have can cost roughly $1 million to receive and even more to develop. Synthego aims to help reduce that cost and speed up the development process. While a handful of startups are doing gene-editing work with Crispr, Synthego is the only one selling ready-to-use kits.

Its kits "open up a whole new world" to researchers, Synthego cofounder and CEO Paul Dabrowski told Business Insider.

And the new funds — a combined $110 million from the tech mogul Peter Thiel's Founders Fund as well as 8VC and Menlo Ventures — will help expand the company's reach even further, Dabrowski said. For the first time, the company is beginning to make kits intended for use in the clinic, a goal he said the company aimed to achieve by next year.

In a statement, Thiel said Synthego's platform would "ultimately unlock the full potential of genome engineering."

'A future where cell and gene therapies are as accessible as vaccines'

sgRNA Kit largeFew patients have had the chance to get a revolutionary type of treatment long touted as having the potential to cure dozens of diseases.

Called gene therapy, the approach involves modifying a person's DNA to address the underlying cause of an inherited disease. Doctors take a sample of someone's diseased cells, correct the errors in the code, and return the corrected cells to the person's body. Over time, the healthy cells outnumber the diseased ones, and the illness disappears for good, the thinking goes.

The Western world's first gene therapy, a drug called Glybera that was designed to treat a rare disease in which patients can't properly process fat, was used only a single time after being approved in the European Union in 2012. After lackluster demand, the manufacturer uniQure pulled it from the market in 2017. The first gene therapy to be approved in the US, Luxturna, promises to cure a rare inherited form of blindness. Its price tag is $850,000.

Crispr is a gene-editing tool that makes it easier and cheaper to modify genomes and could help usher in new gene therapies. But few researchers have fully embraced Crispr; the technique is new and can take months of practice to feel comfortable using. That's where Synthego wants to help. Synthego's core product helps scientists study potential cures by packaging Crispr in an easy-to-use format. As part of its latest funding round, the company is — for the first time — starting to make products that are ready to use in a clinical setting.

"One of the things we're doing with our Crispr platform is making it clinical-grade ready," Dabrowski said.

Dabrowski says his company's Crispr editing kits significantly shrink the time and the cost of research and development. If the company can make products that are ready to use in the clinic, "there's an ability"— eventually — "to actually make the medicines for our customers," Dabrowski said.

"We believe it's going to be possible to make cell and gene therapies that are as accessible as vaccines," Dabrowski said.

A star-studded advisory board

Jennifer Doudna CRISPRSynthego sells two types of Crispr kits in roughly 50 countries. In the US, clients include the Mayo Clinic and two high-profile labs at Stanford and the University of California at Berkeley, where scientists use the kits to carry out research and development on potential new treatments.

Jennifer Doudna, one of the inventors of Crispr and a UC Berkeley geneticist, uses Synthego's products in her lab, Dabrowski said. Doudna also joined Synthego as an adviser in March and invested in the company during its second-stage, or series B, round last year.

As part of the latest funding round, another high-profile researcher, the Stanford professor and physician Matthew Porteus, joined Synthego's advisory board. Porteus has been working on gene and cell therapies for half a decade and cofounded Crispr Therapeutics, one of several public companies working on developing gene-editing-based treatments. Sir Andrew Witty, the CEO of the technology and services division of UnitedHealth Group who once served as CEO of the pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline, is also on Synthego's advisory board.

Both of Synthego's kits are designed to make working with Crispr easier. The first, called Crisprevolution, is designed for researchers who already have experience working with the tool and costs as little as $225. As part of the latest funding round, Synthego will be expanding that product line so that by next year it could offer clinical-grade materials with the potential to help make therapeutics for patients. Synthego's other product, called Engineered Cells, was designed for non-Crispr experts in mind and costs nonacademics $3,500, or $2,500 for researchers.

"You come to the website, tell us what you want modified, swipe your credit card, and a few weeks later you end up with an edited cell line," Dabrowski said.

That significantly shortens a process that normally takes months — and could help researchers turn big ideas into real, accessible treatments within a few years, Dabrowski hopes.

"You get rid of a huge road block," Dabrowski said.

SEE ALSO: 40 AND UNDER: The Silicon Valley biotech stars who are backing startups aiming to cure disease, prolong life, and fix the food system

DON'T MISS: A new biotech company has raised $25 million to help unleash a 'virgin market' of psychedelic research

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Why horseshoe crab blood is so expensive


Regulators just gave DNA-testing startup 23andMe the go-ahead to offer a health product that scientists have called dubious

$
0
0

23andMe Co-Founder and CEO Anne Wojcicki speaks onstage during TechCrunch Disrupt SF 2017 at Pier 48 on September 19, 2017 in San Francisco, California.

  • Anne Wojcicki, the CEO and founder of the genetics-testing startup 23andMe, said a few weeks ago that she hoped the company would add a new health offering that looked at how customers processed medications, including those for depression, cardiology, and infectious disease.
  • On Wednesday, federal regulators gave the company the green light to offer such a test.
  • The next day, experts from the same agency warned people against taking similar tests from other companies because they "may not be accurate."
  • Albertsons pharmacies and the gene-testing startup Color Genomics offer the same type of test for $250 to $750, but many scientists say it's not worth the money.

Anne Wojcicki, the CEO and founder of the popular Silicon Valley gene-testing company 23andMe, said in mid-October that she didn't feel as if the company was offering what she called a "complete product."

That's because its latest gene-testing kit — which includes health screenings for some of the genes involved in Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and breast cancer — did not include a test looking at how customers processed medications, including those for depression.

But on Wednesday, Wojcicki's company got the green light from the Food and Drug Administration to sell such a test. The next day, experts from the same agency warned people against using similar tests "whose claims have not been reviewed by the FDA."

23andMe's test is the first of its kind to get FDA clearance to be sold directly to consumers online or in stores. Several other similar tests are on the market, but all require the involvement of a physician or a psychiatrist.

The tests assess which genes are involved in breaking down various medications (including antidepressants and some heart medications) in the body. Versions are being offered by psychiatrists and Albertsons pharmacists in three major cities at a hefty price tag of $750. Just last month, another Silicon Valley genetics-testing startup, Color Genomics, began offering the test as part of its $250 kits.

Many scientists feel the tests don't offer a clear benefit to people and say that in many cases they are not worth the money. Among other issues, the tests may give conflicting results to the same patient for the same medication and don't tell providers which specific medication is best, according to experts.

In giving 23andMe permission to market the test, the FDA included several important caveats.

It said that the new test was "not intended to provide information on a patient's ability to respond to any specific medication," that the test didn't provide medical advice, and that patients should check with their doctors before stopping medications.

Scientists have previously warned customers against using other 23andMe services. In the spring, when the company began offering its genetic screening for breast cancer, researchers called it "concerning" because it did not involve a genetics counselor who could explain to customers that the test looked at only a small number of the genetic variants involved in the disease.

'When we can bring pharmacogenomics back, then we have a complete product back'

23andMe kitIn the early days of 23andMe, the company included a test for depression medications in its lineup of health offerings, Wojcicki said. But in 2013, the FDA forced the company to stop selling those products and get federal approval on the grounds that the tests could be misinterpreted as health advice. The company was allowed to continue selling the genealogy component of its kit, which looks at ancestry.

Last year, the FDA gave the company the green light to again sell some of its health screenings. On the heels of that decision, 23andMe rolled out a limited selection of some of its original products. The most recent addition, unveiled earlier this year, is a test for some of the genes involved in the risk of developing breast cancer, also known as BRCA genes.

Now, the company was only missing one of those original health products, Wojcicki said in October: a test for medications, also called pharmacogenomics.

"The only one we don’t have back yet is pharmacogenomics. We used to have that and we'd like to have that one come back," Wojcicki said at a panel discussion at the Rock Health Summit in San Francisco a few weeks ago.

"When we can bring pharmacogenomics back, then we have a complete product back," she added.

What the FDA approved

Because 23andMe sells its tests directly to people (they can be purchased online and at a selection of drug stores), it needed to get FDA approval before marketing its latest test.

That happened Wednesday.

"This test is a step forward in making information about genetic variants available directly to consumers and better inform their discussions with their healthcare providers," Tim Stenzel, a director in the FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health, said in the statement.

Then on Thursday, experts from the agency warned people against taking other, similar tests that have not received FDA approval.

Specifically, the agency described tests "that claim to predict how a patient will respond to specific medications" and continued to say those claims "may not be supported by scientific and clinical evidence and may not be accurate."

A 23andMe representative told Business Insider that its newest test, which did receive FDA approval, would most likely be incorporated into the company's existing health lineup. The person could not yet provide details on how much the new test would cost. Along with its genealogy service, the company has health tests for Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and breast cancer that sell collectively for $199.

Color Genomics chose to incorporate its pharmacogenomics product into its existing lineup, which retails for $250.

But unlike 23andMe, which sells its services directly to consumers, Color requires people to order their tests through a medical provider.

In addition, the company mandates talking to a professional genetics counselor and a clinical pharmacist to avoid potentially dangerous misinterpretations of the results.

Genomind and Assurex, the two companies that offer a standalone pharmacogenomics product, sell the test through psychiatrists and some pharmacists for $750.

In its authorization statement, the FDA included the following caveats about 23andMe's new product:

  • It is "not intended to provide information on a patient’s ability to respond to any specific medication."
  • It "does not describe an association between the detected variants and any specific drug nor whether a person will or will not respond to a particular drug."
  • "Health care providers should not use the test to make any treatment decisions."
  • "Results from this test should be confirmed with independent pharmacogenetic testing before making any medical decisions."

23andMe did not provide further details on when the newest test would be available to customers. Earlier this month, Wojcicki said she saw the pharmacogenomics service as part of the company's overall mission to help empower customers with more data about themselves and prevent negative health outcomes when possible.

"I think one thing genetics can do is help prevent a lot of early deaths," Wojcicki said.

Still, the FDA's Stenzel offered caution for people who choose to take the test:

"This test should be used appropriately because it does not determine whether a medication is appropriate for a patient, does not provide medical advice, and does not diagnose any health conditions."

SEE ALSO: DNA tests that cost as much as $750 claim to tell you which antidepressant is best for you, but scientists say they're not worth the money

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Here are some of the odd 'defects' the FDA allows inside processed food

Google's life-extension spinoff teamed up with Ancestry to study 54 million family trees — and learned that a surprising factor helps determine how long we live

$
0
0

happy couple

  • Genealogy and DNA site Ancestry once partnered with Google's stealthy life-extension spinoff, a company called Calico, to study the genetics of longevity.
  • The new study suggests that our genes play less of a role in how long we live than previously believed.
  • Instead, traits and behaviors that include everything from diet and exercise to friendliness appear to play a strong role in longevity.
  • But surprisingly, we still pass these traits on through generations — mostly by picking partners who look and act like us, the researchers suggest.

The road to achieving a long life is littered with hype. The usual life-extension suspects include pricey pills and supplements; the peculiar involve infusions of young blood and chambers pumped with sub-zero temperatures. 

Then there's science. And one scientific factor that has long been presumed to dictate much of how long we live is our DNA. For decades, it was assumed that the genes we inherit from our parents explain anywhere from 15% to 30% of the variations in longevity that are observed between people.

But a new study that came from quiet collaboration between genetics company Ancestry and a Google life-extension spinoff called Calico suggests that our genes play less of a role in our lifespan than we thought.  

Instead, traits and behaviors that include everything from diet and exercise to friendliness appears to play a strong role in longevity. Surprisingly, we still pass these traits on through generations — mostly by picking partners who look and act like us, the researchers report.

In essence, the findings suggest that people effectively transfer longevity from one generation to the next much in the same way that wealth and socioeconomic status are passed from parents to children: by choosing partners with attitudes and attributes that mirror our own, regardless of how different their DNA may be.

Picking partners who act and think like us

older people

For decades, researchers studying longevity and genetics had estimated that the genes we inherit from our parents play a significant role in determining how long we live. Previous studies suggested that genes account for as much as 30% of the total variability in lifespan between individuals.

But the new study from Ancestry and Calico indicates that our DNA may be much less important in determining longevity than traits and behaviors like diet, exercise, and personality. After looking at data from more than 54 million family trees and the birth and death information for over 400 million individuals, the researchers concluded that our DNA accounts for less than 10% of lifespan variability.

Instead, we pass on longevity through generations by choosing partners whose attitudes and attributes look much like our own. In research parlance, that's known as "assortative mating."

"The true heritability of human longevity for birth cohorts across the 1800s and early 1900s was well below 10%, and ... has been generally overestimated due to the effect of assortative mating," the scientists wrote.

Put another way, we tend to pick partners with attitudes and attributes — from eating and exercising to friendliness — that mirror our own. And as a result, we tend to live similar amounts of time, and have children who do as well.

How friendly we are and how often we work out may play a stronger role in our longevity than our DNA

woman running jogging exercise

Previous studies shed light on how important lifestyle factors are when it comes to how long we live. In a recent study published in the journal Circulation, for example, scientists pinpointed five lifestyle factors that appear to be linked with a significantly longer lifespan, judging by the outcomes of two long-term studies that involved about 123,000 adults.

People in the study who lived long lives tended to:

  • Do at least 30 minutes of cardio exercise every day.
  • Eat a Mediterranean diet.
  • Never smoke.
  • Stick to a healthy body weight.
  • Drink no more than 1-2 alcoholic beverages a day.

As part of several other recent studies, scientists have uncovered a handful of personality traits that also appear to be strongly linked to longer-than-average lives. They include:

Taken together, the findings suggest that how long we live may be less a matter of what we're born with than the circumstances in which we live and the choices that we make. Those choices, as the Ancestry and Google researchers acknowledge in their new paper, tend to be based on everything from social status to wealth and then, just like genetics, passed on from one generation to the next.

SEE ALSO: DNA-testing company 23andMe has signed a $300 million deal with a drug giant. Here's how to delete your data if that freaks you out.

DON'T MISS: Researchers have discovered 5 simple factors that have been linked to living about a decade longer

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The first woman in space almost didn't make it back to Earth and she had to keep it a secret for 30 years

I shipped my spit to AncestryDNA to see how much I could learn from my genes — and found out my family history is more complex than I thought

$
0
0

hello

I have to admit: I've become a genetics geek. Ever since I sent my first saliva sample to be analyzed by consumer-genetics company 23andMe, I've become obsessed with what I can find out from a sample of my DNA.

After trying out 23andMe's $199 test, I wanted to see how one of its competitors' tests stacked up.

For $99, AncestryDNA will sequence your genes to help trace your geographic roots. It doesn't provide health and wellness information, although Ancestry launched a program aimed at tracking family-health history called AncestryHealth. The company also recently teamed up with Alphabet's biotechnology company, Calico, to study the genetics of the human lifespan. 

Here's what it was like to use AncestryDNA:

RELATED: I tried 23andMe's new genetics test — and now I know why the company caused such a stir

SEE ALSO: The 7 best science-backed fitness apps

Shortly after I ordered it online, my AncestryDNA kit arrived in the mail in a small box the size of a hardcover book.

Learn more here.



Opening it up, I found a collection tube (and a bag to seal it in once I was done), a set of instructions, and a smaller box to send it all back in.



No stranger to collection tubes, I wasn't quite looking forward to spitting up to the top of the line on this tube. As I learned previously, generating enough spit for the collection process (which helps ensure the company has enough DNA to run it a second time in case of errors) can be hard work.



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

I tried National Geographic's next-generation ancestry test and was surprised by my results

$
0
0

Helix DNA 6

By now, I should have a crystal-clear picture of my ancestry.

Both 23andMe and AncestryDNA have done a good job of confirming my Scandinavian origins.

So when I decided to try National Geographic's new Geno 2.0 test, I expected my results to be roughly the same.

National Geographic's Genographic Project has been around since 2005, making it one of the earliest genetics tests. A few months ago, it switched over to Helix's next-generation sequencing platform for its Geno 2.0 test.

What I got in my inbox looked nothing like what I'd seen before.

SEE ALSO: 2 tragedies intersected to give this man a face transplant — and the story that unfolded is powerful

DON'T MISS: I've taken AncestryDNA and 23andMe genetics tests — here's what I tell people when they ask me which one is best

A box containing my Genographic Project Geno 2.0 test arrived at my office in December, and I couldn't wait to check it out.



Inside the sleeve was a booklet and a box from Helix. A company spun off from the sequencing giant Illumina, Helix is positioning itself as the app store for your DNA. Once I sent in the tube of spit containing my DNA, Helix could apply that information to other tests down the line — not just the National Geographic one I was trying.

Source: Business Insider



The box was unlike other DNA tests I've tried. The combination of geometric shapes and bright boxes made it fun, and when I lifted up the pink box I found a helpful tip written underneath: "Having trouble salivating? Think about lemons!"



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

Some of the most popular DNA kits are on sale right for Black Friday at their lowest prices ever — here's a quick break down of each one

$
0
0

The Insider Picks team writes about stuff we think you'll like. Business Insider has affiliate partnerships, so we get a share of the revenue from your purchase.

DNA Testing 23andMe

By nature, Black Friday is a day that's very much about materialism. Consumers flood stores and online sites in search of deals on tech, men's fashionwomen's fashion, mattresses, and more. But if you'd prefer to spend your money on experiences or learning opportunities, a DNA kit might be the perfect way to do so.

If you've ever been interested in understanding more about your ancestry or family history, right now is the best time to get a DNA kit as many of the best ones are discounted for Black Friday. (Might we add, they also make great holiday gifts for friends and family!)

Brands like 23andMe, AncestryDNA, and Vitagene all make easy-to-use at-home kits that can provide results in a matter of weeks. In addition to your family history, certain kits can assess your health, provide useful insight to improve your fitness, or track down historical relatives.

While many tests unveil similar data, there are key differences between each one. Check them out below and compare deal prices.

Looking for more deals? We've rounded up the best Black Friday and Cyber Monday deals on the internet.

AncestryDNA

$49 (Originally $99) [You save $50]

With over 1 billion family connections, AncestryDNA is the best-selling DNA test you can buy. The service helps you discover the people and places that made you who you are by tapping into 350 regions across the world — two times more than the next leading competitor.

The current price is the lowest it's ever been (and possibly ever will be). 



23andMe

$99.99 (Originally $199), available on Amazon [You save $99.01]

Save up to $70 on DNA kits at 23andme.com.

The 23andMe kit is one of the most in-depth at-home DNA tests you can take. Not only will it break down your ancestry, but it will also discover your genetic health risks for diseases like Parkinson's or Alzheimer's, carrier traits for diseases like Cystic Fibrosis and Sickle Cell, report on your wellness with details like sleep patterns and lactose intolerance, and other genetic traits. If you're only interested in learning your ancestry you can buy the genetics kit for half off.



National Geographic Geno 2.0

$55.99 (Originally $99.99), available on Amazon [You save $44]

The National Geographic Geno 2.0 Next Generation provides a breakdown of your regional ancestry by percentage, going back as 500,000 years. Once your DNA sample is submitted and processed, you can access the data via the Geno 2.0 smartphone app, where an easy-to-understand video walks you through your ancestry. You'll learn about which historical relatives you could be related to.

 



See the rest of the story at Business Insider
Viewing all 463 articles
Browse latest View live


<script src="https://jsc.adskeeper.com/r/s/rssing.com.1596347.js" async> </script>