You don’t need to test your DNA
The always intriguing Dr. Hsien-Hsien Lei wrote a piece today titled 10 Reasons NOT to Take a DNA Test. At the end, she asks, “What other reasons can you think of to convince someone NOT to take a DNA test?”
I have a couple, but first let’s approach the wording of the question. Are we trying to convince people that DNA testing is bad (i.e., it would be a lousy idea to take the test) or that they don’t need it (i.e., there’s no compelling argument for the affirmative)?
In addition, in order to truly answer the question, we need to go into some greater depth about the possible benefits of the test: why would you want to take it in the first place?
The reason to map your DNA is that information is power. Yet nobody claims that our genomes are exclusively definitive of who we are as people.
To dramatically oversimplify a complex concept, let?s say there are two factors that dictate who you are: nature and nurture. Nature is your physical DNA: what you were born with, what you inherited, the stuff you can?t control.
The historical version of nurture is how you are raised, but obviously there?s a lot more to it than that. Your diet, your environment, pollution in the air, whether you exercise: these are all the ?nurture? bits of the equation. They?re subject to choice, and therefore the product of human intention—my intention dictates whether I exercise, whether I drink heavily, whether I watch TV or live in a clean countryside or polluted Beijing.
The question at hand is whether to gain more information about the ‘nature’ side of the equation. What are the cards that we’ve been dealt? It’s natural to want to know more about the underlying physical drivers behind who we are.
On the other hand, even if you do the test, what are you going to do about it? One of the reasons Hsien suggests for avoiding the test is that you’re fatalistic and will let genetic information control your life. But if genetic information doesn’t control our life, why should we want to know about it? Why not just behave the way you want?
If your parents learned that genetically you’re not likely to be tall, they’re unlikely to train you in basketball. But where would that leave Muggsy Bogues?
If you knew you had the genes for testicular cancer, you might not engage in a sport that cramped your testes for hours every day. But where would that leave Lance Armstrong?
At the same time, you might think that if you knew you were at risk for certain diseases, you might choose more healthy options—but why not just choose the healthy options anyway? Why not eat healthy, whether or not your DNA indicates a propensity for heart disease? Why not quit smoking even if you’re not predisposed to lung cancer?
You can’t control the results of the test, but you can control your behavior. You can control your attitude. You can control your choices.
So what do you need the DNA for?
