In 2012, GSK pleaded guilty to promotion of drugs for unapproved uses, failure to report safety data and kickbacks to physicians in the United States and agreed to pay a US$3 billion (£1.9bn) settlement. It was the largest health-care fraud case to date in the US and the largest settlement by a drug company.
I still want fraud prosecuted, regardless of entity. Complex problems are chock full of nuance.
Is there an open genome movement where you can just donate your genome into the public domain? I don't really care who has access to it, but it's a hassle to have to manually apply for each project that wants it.
Alternatively, 23andme could offer compute to pharma companies that can run against their genetic data lake, with DLP and data security controls between them and the pharma customer. This would minimize leakage potential while still allowing compute against the data.
So basically any big pharma or big insurance corporation because those are the ones that will get it eventually and will use it for their own profile without regards to any negative consequences for you or anyone else.
[1] https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/genetic-information-nondiscrim...
[2] https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/policy-issues/Genetic-...
Your health insurance company for example ?
> The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) of 2008 protects Americans from discrimination based on their genetic information in both health insurance (Title I) and employment (Title II). Title I amends the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), the Public Health Service Act (PHSA), and the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), through the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), as well as the Social Security Act, to prohibit health insurers from engaging in genetic discrimination. Title II of GINA is implemented by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and prevents employers from using genetic information in employment decisions and prevents employers from requesting and requiring genetic information from employees or those applying for jobs.
Sharing it, in a personalized manner, with a for-profit start-up without an alternative path to profitability is just so naive... Giving your DNA profile directly to the likes of GSK would be better.
(disclosure: also interviewed there over a decade ago and declined the offer only because of lacking comp, don’t recall the name of their CTO around Jan 2011 but was a cool dude)