News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms ... by reaperducer on Wednesday July 25, 2018 @06:11PM (#17613389)
Using genetic data to find new drugs strikes me as a very good use of this data.

Selling it to anyone who pays the price seems like a bad idea. Which is inevitably what will happen here the next time the company needs to "maximize shareholder value" by "utilizing its assets to their full revenue potential."

Next thing you know, I end up paying higher insurance rates because some distant relative I don't know is predisposed to some disease I've never heard of that is linked to a habit I don't have.

Again, because the insurance company is required to "maximize shareholder value."

Re:GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms ... by ralston on Wednesday July 25, 2018 @06:19PM (#17613448)
Bingo.

> "maximize shareholder value"

> "utilizing its assets to their full revenue potential."

That's quite literally all that needs to be said here. How people fail to see the downside(s) to a large, multi-national, for-profit, shareholder-value-maximizing corporation, having access to (quite literally) their most sensitive information is simply beyond me. What do people expect GSK to say? "We plan to immediately redistribute this data to generate revenue - oh, and we do plan to do some research as well." GSK is not a charity. They do not run on merit, or "doing good things". They run on making - money. Any revenues from any type of wonder drugs developed via this 23&M partnership will be so far down the line (years, if they even come up with any winners). So in the mean time you can bet that they plan to get their ROI from this _investment_ via some type less than morally reputable activity.

Re:GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms ... by cloverich on Wednesday July 25, 2018 @08:40PM (#17614234)
Do you have some examples? I'm not super well informed but 300M seems like a pretty small investment, given a single drug could cost >500M to produce and yield 10B+ in _yearly_ revenue. I'm not claiming one's genetic data is perfectly safe with any company, but that a for profit drug company would use it primarily for drug research seems reasonably sound. In some aspects, I'd expect they'd even have a vested interest in keeping it secure from other drug companies.
Re:GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms ... by guiambros on Wednesday July 25, 2018 @10:40PM (#17614693)
Couldn't agree more. As someone who has his genetic profile with 23andme (as well as my kids, wife, parents, etc), I'm actually looking forward to someone like GSK to come in and use my genetic data to accelerate the discovery of new drugs.

It's shocking that so much genetic data is available, and we're barely scratching the surface, and using for fancy graphs and genealogy trees. We could be finding the cure for real diseases, and improving the lives of millions of people.

Yes, of course the pharma companies will milk the new drugs for the next couple of decades, until they lose the patent, yadda yadda, but at least we're making progress faster. Much better than the alternative - which is to wait decades for the discovery, AND wait more decades for the patents to expire...

Regarding privacy concerns, that's the least of my worries. The money available selling my genetic data (to, say, insurance companies), and the scrutiny and regulation they'd face (in many cases it'd be outright illegal - e.g., minors) is so massive that it'd be stupid to even try. There's a lot more money to be made from the exact same insurance companies by selling overpriced drugs to sick patients with health insurance.

Re:GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms ... by ralston on Thursday July 26, 2018 @12:33PM (#17618731)
> As someone who has his genetic profile with 23andme (as well as my kids, wife, parents, etc)

Well there it is. You couldn't have an objective discussion about this, even if you wanted to. You (and your family) have already gone through the process. So of course you're extremely hopeful/optimistic that this works out with no problems ;)

Re:GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms ... by cloverich on Thursday July 26, 2018 @05:34PM (#17621432)
Vested interest doesn't preclude objective discussion, it just makes it more difficult and more likely to be one-sided. In this case OP argues that the companies most financially lucrative position is to use the data in a way that benefits both the company and society. That stands as a strong argument against the parent comments, regardless of the underlying motivations.
Re:GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms ... by ethbro on Wednesday July 25, 2018 @07:19PM (#17613806)
> Selling it to anyone who pays the price seems like a bad idea. Which is inevitably what will happen here the next time the company needs to "maximize shareholder value" [...]

23andMe is still held exclusively by private capital.

Nowhere in the reporting does it note GSK negotiated the right to resell 23andMe data. Furthermore, it specifically notes "[if an option is taken to extend the arrangement for a 5th year], GSK will become 23andMe’s exclusive drug target discovery collaborator."

Edit: See searine's thread below for a better discussion of why this is critically important to drug development https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17611775

Re:GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms ... by SmellyGeekBoy on Thursday July 26, 2018 @06:20AM (#17616321)
Playing Devil's Advocate here but: I pay more for car insurance because I'm male, despite not having a single accident in 18 years of driving. Maybe the new DNA-based system will be fairer?
Re:GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms ... by aaavl2821 on Wednesday July 25, 2018 @07:22PM (#17613821)
Is the concern that GSK will resell this, or that 23andme will?

I wouldn't be as worried about GSK reselling data to insurance companies. They already have access to sensitive health information for many many people and have had access to this data for decades. You literally cannot get a drug approved without collecting sensitive medical info on patients, because you can't tell if the drug works without collecting this data. Many drugs now require some genetic testing to be done to justify a prescription

There are many laws protecting against this type of data reselling and it also isn't really in a pharma companies business interest to help insurers. Healthcare companies tend to be very protective of and territorial with their data -- especially with enemies -- and pharma and payers aren't generally on the same side

I don't understand why there's an uproar over this but at the same time people are pushing for more medical data sharing among providers / payers etc for "population health". At the very least the absolutely certainty some people are expressing about this data being used maliciously seems unfounded. There is a massive massive difference between how data is handled in tech vs healthcare

Re:GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms ... by krageon on Thursday July 26, 2018 @11:10AM (#17618064)
You make a lot of bold claims in this post and provide no evidence. I think in this case the claims are far enough out there that some evidence is warranted.

For example: "They already have access to sensitive health information for many many people and have had access to this data for decades". In what country is this? Everywhere? You would be wrong about that, unless you mean a specific group of people that gave them this information voluntarily (in which case you made it sound a lot more exceptional than it is).

"Many drugs now require some genetic testing to be done to justify a prescription". How many? I've interacted with a lot of people who take (or have taken) prescriptions, and have met precisely zero that needed a genetic test. Of course this doesn't mean you are wrong, but maybe you have omitted critical data required for forming the opinion that you are correct. I already mentioned the number (and perhaps the type of prescription is also important). Also again, where in the world is this?

These aren't the only two claims I raised an eyebrow about, but they are a good start.

Re:GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms ... by aaavl2821 on Thursday July 26, 2018 @02:57PM (#17619937)
I come from a biotech background, and I felt that a lot of the claims others were making about how it was basically guaranteed that GSK would start selling genetic data to insurers were very bold claims with no evidence. I get that in tech data protection and privacy culture and regulations are very different than in healthcare, and there are legitimate concerns especially with 23andme having healthcare data (given how fast and loose they play by the rules governing healthcare), but the tone of some of the comments seemed so confident in their opinions without providing much evidence. I guess each side believes the burden of proof lies with the other

In the spirit of not wanting to seem that way myself:

* here is a link to all of the clinical studies currently being conducted by glaxosmithkline: [0]. There are 4,662 studies currently listed. This is across dozens of countries. Click around and look at the data they are collecting (look at the endpoints, inclusion / exclusion criteria, etc). This is all clinical study data, so patients have to volunteer for this, but you also have to opt in to sharing your data for 23andme. I also know of a few companies that collected lab data from patients and sold them to pharma companies so they could target them with ads; patients had to opt in to this and there were privacy protections; I'd imagine there are plenty of other examples like this.

Also, thousands of other companies have access to massive amounts of health data, genetic and otherwise: EMR companies, insurance companies, hospitals, etc. Many of these groups share information with each other all the time, including genetic information. How else could a lab share with a hospital a patients sequence data? Why is this GSK / 23andme deal particularly concerning? Is it because 23andme or GSK are viewed as bad actors?

* here is a list of FDA approved nucleic acid based tests: [1]. More and more drugs are being approved to treat patients with specific genotypes, see slide 316 [2]

[0] https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=&term=glaxo&cntr...

[1] https://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ProductsandMedicalProcedu...

[2] https://iabsverige.se/wp-content/uploads/InternetTrends2017R...

Re:GlaxoSmithKline makes $300M investment in 23andMe, forms ... by booleandilemma on Wednesday July 25, 2018 @10:50PM (#17614743)
Wouldn’t that violate HIPAA, or something?