Archive for April, 2009


Annals of epidemiology

While tests were unable to determine how Craigslist contracted human papillomavirus, the site’s casual relationships with more than 40 million users nationwide is likely to blame. Internal records revealed that Craigslist routinely allowed complete strangers to sign up on its site, the vast majority of them sexually perverse, morally depraved, and lacking even rudimentary hygiene skills.

“We tried to ignore the signs, but every day more and more of those weird wart-looking things started showing up on our home page,” said a Craigslist developer who wished to remain anonymous. “I honestly didn’t think it was possible, but the cotton swabs confirmed it. Craigslist has HPV.”

Tweetle dee

I’m not sure what to make of this, but someone emailed last night and said, “…I’m guessing that I’m probably the first person to ever tweet your DNA.

You are correct, sir!

And since you’ve obviously read my profile, maybe you could send me a business card just in case.

Of course, every day is DNA Day around here

 

Happy almost-DNA Day! I spent the morning at Lowes Grove Middle School discussing genomes, alpacas, agriculture, Monsanto and genetic ancestry testing. Thanks to all of the students and thanks to Ms. Lewis!

(Photo from Double D Alpaca Ranch)

I’m inclined to wait for the winning bidder’s feedback

I love this [via Genomeweb]:

In a sign that genome-mapping is becoming increasingly common, a company called Knome plans to offer its personal gene-sequencing service to the highest bidder in an eBay auction set to begin on Friday and continue for 10 days. The company plans to opening the bidding at $68,000.

Daniel has his usual cogent breakdown, explaining why patience is a virtue.

Anyway, um, while you’re waiting for the genome bidding war to commence, perhaps I can interest you in something else that is considerably less expensive and easier to interpret?

You too can be a big mouth

From The Times:

The risks and social challenges posed by genetic tests and other health services sold directly to consumers have prompted Britain’s most influential ethical think-tank to begin an inquiry into personalised medicine.

While DNA screens, personal MRI scans and internet advice services that bypass GPs have the potential to empower patients and encourage people to take greater responsibility for their health, they also have drawbacks, according to the Nuffield Council on Bioethics.

One of the drawbacks, of course, is that think tanks start to ask your opinion about these things. I hope to have my response to the consultation posted before the July 21 deadline, he said with a mostly straight face.

No more lonely nights

 

(CNN) – Earth Day may fall later this week, but as far as former NASA astronaut Edgar Mitchell and other UFO enthusiasts are concerned, the real story is happening elsewhere…Mitchell grew up in Roswell, New Mexico, which some UFO believers maintain was the site of a UFO crash in 1947. He said residents of his hometown “had been hushed and told not to talk about their experience by military authorities.” They had been warned of “dire consequences” if they did so.

[via The Awl, which I love]

Quote of the day

Above all, don’t fear difficult moments. The best comes from them.

- Nobel Laureate Rita Levi Montalcini, on the occasion of her 100th birthday

Genome scanning a dead horse

In the current New England Journal of Medicine, David Goldstein wrote:

If common variants are responsible for most genetic components of type 2 diabetes, height, and similar traits, then genetics will provide relatively little guidance about the biology of these conditions, because most genes are “height genes” or “type 2 diabetes genes.”

In response, a friend of mine emailed and asked:

“What I find difficult to accept is that [Goldstein] has ongoing [genome-wide association] studies, so does he not believe in his own work?”

My response: I can’t speak for David, but having just read his commentary, I think he would say that if you’re going to do GWAS, the disease itself should probably not be the phenotype under study, because we’ve done those studies and so far they’ve produced a failry shitty ROI, at least by conventional definitions of clinical relevance. You’ll have more luck studying endophenotypes, e.g., drug response, brain structure as measured by MRI, a decline in working in memory, etc.

In an accompanying commentary, Joel Hirschhorn wrote:

I believe that the skeptics’ arguments either misconstrue the primary goal of genomewide association studies or are contradicted by their findings. The main goal of these studies is not prediction of individual risk but rather discovery of biologic pathways underlying polygenic diseases and traits. It is already clear that the genes being identified expose relevant biology.

Hmm. Yes of course we’ve learned a lot of biology, but isn’t this moving the goal posts a little bit? In the grants we write, do we not extol the clinical relevance of our work and the enormous promise it holds for diagnostics, therapeutics and–gasp!–actual cures for the diseases that ravage our species? Or do we modestly say, “Each discovery of a biologically relevant locus is a potential first step in a translational journey?” If we acknowledge that 100 years elapsed between the elucidation of the chemical makeup of cholesterol and the development of statins, does that make it okay? Given that 45 years have passed since the recognition that human response to anticoagulant drugs is genetically mediated and we STILL can’t agree about whether pharmacogenetic testing is a good idea, do we just shrug and say, “It is what it is?”

As I’ve said here before by way of disclosure, David Goldstein is a friend and colleague. Even if I don’t always agree with him (and I think he’s wrong when he offers the usual broad indictment of the personal genomics companies), I admire his willingness to — as Richard Preston said of Craig Venter — fart in church.

In the end I’ve had about enough of this debate. It is as if we are arguing over the merits of the compact disc when we all know its days are numbered. Within two years, I imagine that most everyone doing molecular human genetics and genomics of any kind will be sequencing whole genomes.

Whether anyone will understand the data is another matter…

Hybrid vigor: Bettye LaVette and Pete Townshend

Requiescat in pace

The power of genes, environment, television, humanity and love.