Pitfalls of Genetic Testing
- 2 May 1996
- journal article
- Published by Massachusetts Medical Society in New England Journal of Medicine
- Vol. 334 (18), 1192-1194
- https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199605023341812
Abstract
Genes have become the preferred way to explain all types of ill health and unwanted behavior. Some of the attributions seem fairly clear-cut, but many are being embraced uncritically and oversold. This situation can be troubling for clinicians, as well as for the general public. It is often hard to be sure that genes do account for someone's complex condition, such as circulatory problems or cancer. But even when such an association seems fairly clear, it is hard to know what practical conclusions to draw. Unfortunately, many of these uncertainties arise from the way genes function, not just from shortcomings . . .Keywords
This publication has 9 references indexed in Scilit:
- BRCA1— Lots of Mutations, Lots of DilemmasNew England Journal of Medicine, 1996
- Testing GenesScience News, 1995
- Informed consent and BRCA1 testingNature Genetics, 1995
- Necessary but insufficientNature Medicine, 1995
- Assessment and counseling for women with a family history of breast cancer. A guide for cliniciansPublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1995
- Attitudes toward direct predictive testing for the Huntington disease gene. Relevance for other adult-onset disorders. The Canadian Collaborative Group on Predictive Testing for Huntington DiseasePublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1993
- Correlation between Genotype and Phenotype in Patients with Cystic FibrosisNew England Journal of Medicine, 1993
- On the molecular genetics of retinitis pigmentosaScience, 1992
- Haemophilia B: database of point mutations and short additions and deletionsNucleic Acids Research, 1990