Private companies are offering personal DNA sequencing along with interpretation. What services do they offer? Do you think that these services should be regulated, and if so, in what way? Investigate one such company, 23andMe, at http://www.23andMe.com, before answering these questions.

Yeager, M., et al. [(2007) Nature Genetics 39:645–649] and Sladek, R., et al. [(2007) Nature 445:881–885] have used single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genome-wide association studies (GWAS) to identify novel risk loci for prostate cancer and Type 2 diabetes, respectively. Each study suggests that disease-risk genes can be identified that significantly contribute to the disease state. Given your understanding of such complex diseases, what would you determine as reasonable factors to consider when interpreting the results of GWAS?

Following the tragic shooting of 20 children at a school in Newtown, Connecticut, in 2012, Connecticut's state medical examiner requested a full genetic analysis of the killer's genome. What do you think investigators might be looking for? What might they expect to find? Might this analysis lead to an oversimplified analysis of the cause of the tragedy?

Would you have your genome sequenced, if the price was affordable? Why or why not? If you answered yes, would you make your genome sequence publicly available? How might such information be misused?

In 2010, a U.S. District Judge ruled to invalidate Myriad Genetics' patents on the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Judge Sweet noted that since the genes are part of the natural world, they are not patentable. Myriad Genetics also holds patents on the development of a direct-to-consumer test for the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes.

Would you agree with the ruling to invalidate the patenting of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes? If you were asked to judge the patenting of the direct-to-consumer test for the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, how would you rule?

Should the FDA regulate direct-to-consumer genetic tests, or should these tests be available as a 'buyer beware' product?

In 2010, a U.S. District Judge ruled to invalidate Myriad Genetics' patents on the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Judge Sweet noted that since the genes are part of the natural world, they are not patentable. Myriad Genetics also holds patents on the development of a direct-to-consumer test for the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes.

J. Craig Venter has filed a patent application for his 'first-ever human-made life form.' This patent is designed to cover the genome of M. genitalium. Would your ruling for Venter's 'organism' be different from the judge's ruling on patenting of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes?