A cautionary note

[CameronCat]

I have always had grave concerns about these DNA tests from private, profit-making corporations. Security & intent must always be considerations.

A similar article by Peter J. Pitts ( a former Food and Drug Administration associate commissioner) ran in some U.S. papers today. The link to my local paper is behind a paywall but a bit of Googling should find it available in public ... the title here was "Worried on privacy? Don’t forget ancestry sites share info, too."

A sample quote:
"Testing firms seek users’ permission to share the data. But they gloss over the risks. As a result, consumers sign away their rights with little comprehension of the privacy violations and discrimination that could ensue.

Take Invitae. Its privacy policy says it may use patients’ “de-identified” data for “general research purposes,” which may include “research collaborations with third parties” or “commercial collaborations with private companies.” The problem is that the data aren’t permanently “de-identified.” The information can easily be tied back to specific people.

Just ask Harvard Medical School professor Latanya Sweeney. She recently identified the names of more than 40 percent of participants in a supposedly anonymous DNA study. Sweeney cross-referenced participants’ provided zip codes, birthdays, and genders with public records like voter rolls. She then was able to match people up to their DNA."