Government Technology

    Digital Communities
    Industry Members

  • Click sponsor logos for whitepapers, case studies, and best practices.
  • McAfee

Student DNA Testing Scaled Back at University of California, Berkeley

DNA strand
DNA strand

August 13, 2010 By

A plan to analyze the DNA of incoming students at the University of California, Berkeley and give them personalized results was recently scaled back amid concerns that such research amounts to a medical diagnosis -- a violation of state and federal laws.

The university has already sent more than 5,000 genetic testing kits to incoming students for the voluntary, anonymous program, which involves testing three common gene variants that would "reveal aspects of how an individual metabolizes milk, alcohol and vitamin B9 [folic acid]." About 600 students consented to the test and provided their saliva samples, according to the university, which contests the state's position that the program violates any statutes.

"The change to UC Berkeley's program was necessitated because the California Department of Public Health [CDPH] insisted that since students would have been given access to their own test results, the academic exercise was not exempt from laws designed to assure the accuracy and quality of diagnostic tests used in providing medical care to patients," a university press release stated.

In a statement from CDPH Policy and Programs Chief Deputy Director Kevin Reilly, he contends that human medical tests must be performed in licensed laboratories if the results are to be released to the person. A UC Berkeley campus laboratory that routinely conducts genotyping was chosen to perform the DNA tests, which is exempt from such rules under California law, the university claims.

The CDPH disagrees. "Research laboratories that do research testing only and do not report individual results are exempted from this license requirement," Reilly said in the prepared statement.

While UC Berkeley agreed not to provide personal test results, the university is asking the CDPH to provide legal authority for its interpretation of requirements that are applicable to research and teaching projects. It was unclear whether the CDPH had done so by Friday, Aug. 13.

Experiment or Health Study?

UC Berkeley also contends that because the program -- called "Bring Your Genes to Cal" -- is an educational experiment, and because the students aren't patients and the three genetic variants aren't disease related, the university is exempt from state and federal laws the CDPH claims it would be violating.

"We have taken every precaution and are committed to following the letter of the law with regard to any issue, but we believe this is a flawed reading of the statute that raises questions about who has control over teaching at the university, and in the broader sense, who has control over information about our own genes," UC Berkeley Dean of Biological Sciences at the College of Letters and Science Mark Schlissel said in the release.

The university will still analyze the DNA samples in its campus research labs, present results in aggregate to students during lectures and panel discussions during the fall 2010 semester and continue the discussion of personalized medicine. But the focus of such discussions is likely to change after the CDPH's instructions, Schlissel said.

"As a result of questions raised in the last few months, the program will focus prominently on the politics of genetic testing and whether individuals, rather than physicians and public agencies, ultimately control their own genetic information," Schlissel said in the release.

The DNA testing was being offered as part of UC Berkeley's yearly incoming student orientation program, which typically includes sending freshmen and transfer students a topical book or DVD in the summer to be discussed in the fall. Schlissel and genetics professor Jasper Rine teamed up to lead the DNA project, which Rine said would help students develop skills

| More


Add Your Comment

You are solely responsible for the content of your comments. We reserve the right to remove comments that are considered profane, vulgar, obscene, factually inaccurate, off-topic, or considered a personal attack.

In Our Library

White Papers | Exclusives Reports | Webinar Archives | Best Practices and Case Studies
Digital Cities & Counties Survey: Best Practices Quick Reference Guide
This Best Practices Quick Reference Guide is a compilation of examples from the 2013 Digital Cities and Counties Surveys showcasing the innovative ways local governments are using technological tools to respond to the needs of their communities. It is our hope that by calling attention to just a few examples from cities and counties of all sizes, we will encourage further collaboration and spark additional creativity in local government service delivery.
Wireless Reporting Takes Pain (& Wait) out of Voting
In Michigan and Minnesota counties, wireless voting via the AT&T network has brought speed, efficiency and accuracy to elections - another illustration of how mobility and machine-to-machine (M2M) technology help governments to bring superior services and communication to constituents.
Why Would a City Proclaim Their Data “Open by Default?”
The City of Palo Alto, California, a 2013 Center for Digital Government Digital City Survey winner, has officially proclaimed “open” to be the default setting for all city data. Are they courageous or crazy?
View All