The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information

Authors Filter?
Razib Khan
Nothing found
 TeasersGene Expression Blog

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
🔊 Listen RSS

In the annals of “good GATTACA”, Rape suspect indicted with cutting-edge DNA testing:

A Dedham man freed earlier this year while awaiting trial on charges that he raped and robbed two women in Boston in 2004 has been re-indicted in the case, after cutting-edge DNA testing pointed to him as a suspect and ruled out his identical twin brother, according to authorities.

“To the best of my knowledge, this is the first time that any prosecutor’s office in America has attempted to use this [DNA testing] technique in court,” said Suffolk District Attorney Daniel F. Conley on Wednesday.

The suspect has an identical twin. This naturally results in reasonable doubt if you use standard genomic technology, which lacks the precision to discern any differences to a high degree of confidence when the sequences are so similar. But a very small number of mutations are unique to a given twin. To pull these needles out of the haystack you need powerful genomic technology. The prosecutors paid $100,000 dollars and had to delay the trial. But it seems that it was worth it. This level of sequencing power will not be needed in most cases in the future, but, it does make it so that legal dramas which hinge around the identity of a perp where the suspect has an identical twin will be the cause of less tension.

• Category: Race/Ethnicity • Tags: Sequencing 
🔊 Listen RSS

Over at IEEE Spectrum Eliza Strickland has a long piece, The Gene Machine and Me, which reports on her experience with exome sequencing (this refers to the ~1 percent of the genome, or 30 billion base pairs, which is coding). Being IEEE Spectrum there is much focus on genomic technology, but I suspect this will have as much interest 10-20 years down the line as varieties of combustion engine circa 1900 are to us. In other words, it will be standard technology which we use, not a novel technique which is of interest to non-specialists.

Rather, it’s the biology and medicine which are of more lasting relevance. As is usually the case the promoters of these technologies tend to overestimate the obvious short term impact of their field of advancement. For example, here is this quote: “I do believe that genome sequencing will have as profound an effect on medicine as clean water, antibiotics, and imaging.” No he doesn’t. Public health measures and antiobiotics revolutionized the life expectancy of human beings. Does anyone expect genomic sequencing to add decades to our lives? That low hanging fruit which blasted mortality rates has been picked. No. Rather, sequencing technologies will add information on the margins, and reduce morbidity over one’s lifetime. Not trivial, but not clean water.* There will be a minority of cases where whole genome sequencing will make a big difference, and a majority of cases where it will be part of a broader information portfolio.

Second, some of the descriptions struck me as implausible projections of the future. Or, perhaps more precisely the future recast as a glittery present. This is not a criticism of Strickland, as her treatment follows the standard protocol, where doctors and genetic counselors sift through the reams of data to arrive at better diagnoses and preventative regimes. The problem I see is that this just projects contemporary best practices, and likely resembles predictions of the year 2000 in 1900. Imagining a doctor using information appliances strikes me as similar to imaging advanced steam engines and bicycles. Plausible projections, but ultimately unaware of radical transformations in the nature of human life. I see little value toward throwing enormous clouds of data at human medical doctors. Rather, I suspect a new information ecology will arise where whole genome sequencing and personal self monitoring will be fed through powerful artificial intelligence systems (it is irrelevant to me whether these are “really” intelligent) which will be able to provide immediate advice conditional on our preferences and our past decisions. A metaphor here might be that the decisions about one’s health and well being are like navigating a densely and intricately braided estuary, only powerful information technology can allow one to infer the subtle and imperceptible topography which constraints the river system and scaffolds its flow. To a human eye it would all be flat, and the vast expanse would be a perplexing swamp.

This may all seem science fictional, but we already have the extremely primitive prototypes of these information appliances in form of “smart phones.” To my one year old daughter a “phone” is a rectangular device which responds to touch input. Not only does she communicate via the phone, she is aware that it is a responsive and interactive device. These skills are portable to tablet devices, though her tendency to toss them about diminishes their utility. My point is that novel biomedical technology and the information that they yield, such as whole genome sequencing, is going to come to the fore only when this generation, comfortable with flexible, novel, and analysis rich human-machine interfaces, matures into the fullness of their powers. These are the children who will understand that asking their parents about factual data is a far less effective means of gaining information than utilizing their tablet/phone. They will also infer from that early experience that asking their human doctor for a diagnosis might be less effective than allowing an algorithm to arrive at the most likely probable cause, along with the distribution of less likely causes.

* To be fair, genome sequencing may have a radical impact on the nature of humanity through prenatal screening.

Image credit: Andrew.

(Republished from Discover/GNXP by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Science • Tags: Genome Sequencing, Genomics, Sequencing 
🔊 Listen RSS

Dan MacArthur points me to this story on the sequencing of the West family. You can read the full paper in PLoS Genetics. When the price point for a full genome comes down to $1,000 or so I plan on getting the code for everyone in my immediate family, just like I got everyone genotyped (the latter was cheaper, but a full genome is a much richer data set for intra-familial comparison).

I generated the chart from the figures quoted in the article about the cost of full genome sequencing. I’m moderately familiar with this trend, but it still boggles my mind that we’ve shifted two orders of magnitude in four years! Nice to know that in some domains progress continues.

(Republished from Discover/GNXP by permission of author or representative)
🔊 Listen RSS

The firm GenomeQuest has a blog, and on that blog they have a post, Implications of exponential growth of global whole genome sequencing capacity. In that post there are some bullet points with numbers. Here they are:

* 2001-2009: A Human Genome

* 2010: 1,000 Genomes – Learning the Ropes

* 2011: 50,000 Genomes – Clinical Flirtation

* 2012: 250,000 Genomes – Clinical Early Adoption

* 2013: 1 Million Genomes – Consumer Awareness

* 2014: 5 Million Genomes – Consumer Reality

* 2015-2020: 25 Million Genomes And Beyond – A Brave New World

Let’s transform these projections into charts.



Of course GenomeQuest sells analytics tools for the tsunami of genomic data which they see cresting. Though if only 25,000,000 people have whole genome sequenced by the year 2020, I’m not sure if we’ll feel that it’s a “tsunami” of data at that point. I’m sure there would be plenty of stories about the “sequencing gap” between different communities, by class and race and what not. But what do you think about GenomeQuest’s projections?

(Republished from Discover/GNXP by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Science • Tags: Genomics, Sequencing, Whole Genome Sequencing 
No Items Found
Razib Khan
About Razib Khan

"I have degrees in biology and biochemistry, a passion for genetics, history, and philosophy, and shrimp is my favorite food. If you want to know more, see the links at"