23andMe raises $50M, cuts price to $99, sets goal of 1M genotyped customers

Re:23andMe raises $50M, cuts price to $99, sets goal of 1M g... by tejaswiy on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @01:31PM (#4905908)

This might be the way we're going even if people don't want to share their genetic profile with their insurance company.. what if 23AndMe and UHC (insurance co.) get into a deal where they provide this service for free? And what if UHC raises premiums on everyone that does not take this test? What if employers require their employees to do this much like drug / background checks?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:23andMe raises $50M, cuts price to $99, sets goal of 1M g... by gnaritas on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @01:41PM (#4905980)

> And what if UHC raises premiums on everyone that does not take this test?

Don't think that's legal.

> What if employers require their employees to do this much like drug / background checks?

Also don't think that's legal.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:23andMe raises $50M, cuts price to $99, sets goal of 1M g... by nathos on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @08:59PM (#4908195)

In which case they could make it a "voluntary" check. Like the shady employers that demand candidates' Facebook credentials.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:23andMe raises $50M, cuts price to $99, sets goal of 1M g... by gnaritas on Tuesday December 11, 2012 @11:24PM (#4908636)

Sure, and you say no. Just like you say no to the checkout clerk asking for your phone number when you make a purchase. Same way you so no to a cop when he asks to search your vehicle.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:23andMe raises $50M, cuts price to $99, sets goal of 1M g... by hickory on Wednesday December 12, 2012 @10:44AM (#4910576)

I don't disagree, and that is an easily imaginable scenario. But much like the cop they can still make things at best, uncomfortable, or at worst, nearly intolerable, for you. Creating that sort of de facto requirement is where the real problem lies (there's no legal obligation, but most of those vehicle search requests are performed anyway).

We already have employers requesting "voluntary" disclosure of health information (e.g., cholesterol check) as a condition of continuing group insurance coverage. Since it's illegal to require this information, they make it voluntary - but anyone who opts-out also opts-out of a hefty premium "discount". In reality, the "discounted" rate is closer to what employers would expect to pay for comparable group plans, while the non-discounted premium is high enough that 99% of employees line right up to have their blood drawn by the visiting nurse (conveniently stationed in the conference room down the hall).

[ Parent | on HN ]