Commercial testing of DNA to predict potential health risks or establish ancestry could be inaccurate, harmful and a waste of money, experts warned yesterday.
The Human Genetics Commission, the UK Government's advisory body on human genetics, wants to see tighter controls introduced so people preparing to pay, in some cases, almost £100 are not misled and are aware of the implications.
There are a growing number of companies offering tests which they say will predict the risk of diseases, from bladder and breast cancer to arthritis and Alzheimer's.
Tests are also available which claim to be able to tell whether your ancestors were Picts, Vikings, or where in the world you originated.
However, the expert advice from the commission is: "Think carefully before spending your money - it could be a complete waste."
It is also warning that the medical tests could cause "unnecessary anxiety or give false reassurance". The ancestry tests may be perceived as harmless fun and bring pleasant surprises but they could come as a shock - revealing, for example, that a person's presumed mother or father is not their biological parent.
There is overwhelming support within the commission for a code of practice and when it met yesterday in Aberdeen it was agreed to work on a framework for the principles of direct genetic testing as a step towards a code.
Dr Christine Patch, genetic counselling manager at Guy's Hospital in London and a member of the commission, said commercial companies were testing for genetic variations which have been shown to be linked to diseases.
"Probably this development of testing is premature," she said. "If you had a family history of Alzheimer's disease and you were told you had an increased risk of getting Alzheimer's, that could be quite significant for you.
"The important thing for the person who buys that test is that they know what they are buying, that the information they are given is accurate and that the analysis has been carried out in a proper laboratory with proper controls.
"I think there is a risk that if people lose confidence in results and it becomes like a horoscope - it could lead into a loss of confidence in genetic science.
"I am not suggesting a ban but there needs to be standards. My personal opinion is these tests are a waste of money but people are curious about their own health and if an offer is made and it is not going to clearly harm them they should be allowed to take it up, but it doesn't tell them very much and it may tell them the wrong thing."
She said testing of children was a genuine cause for concern because the tests could be ordered online and sent through the post, making it impossible for laboratories to be confident that an adult who gives consent for the test actually has the authority to give that consent.
An adult could also pretend that a DNA sample taken from a child came from them. Professor Sarah Cunningham-Burley, a member of the commission from Edinburgh University, said: "The tests give only very limited information about one's ancestors and if you go back a few generations, the data is really not meaningful.
"The science of population movements is still itself in the quite early stages so that information isn't very robust.
"I would say think twice' before spending your money on that and think what information you really most want to know and if DNA analysis is actually going to provide it.
"There is potential for harm because people's identities are deeply rooted in who we are and information may challenge our assumptions about ourselves and our heritage."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article