23andMe to California: We're Not Ceasing or Desisting

The Y-chromosome and mtDNA tests used for genealogy purposes carry no health information. But it will be interesting to see how this plays out as there may be some danger of all DNA testing being affected by California's actions.

Janet Crain

=============================================

By Alexis Madrigal June 24, 2008 11:39:04 AMCategories: Genetics

After being hit with a cease-and-desist letter by California's Public Health Department, the highest-profile direct-to-consumer genetic testing company, 23andMe, shot back today that they'll be doing neither.

"We believe we are in compliance with California law and are continuing to operate in California at this time," the company said in a statement released to Wired.com.

23andMe is one of thirteen companies that had until yesterday to respond to identical cease-and-desist letters from the health department. Navigenics, DNATraits, and HairDX also received letters Wired.com has confirmed. The Health Department plans to release the names of the rest of the companies today on its website.

In the full statement 23andMe released, it's unclear exactly what legal tack the company is going to take in fighting (or working with) the health department. But they make clear that they do not believe that the Health Department is applying the "appropriate regulatory framework" to their business:

Cont.

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/06/23andme-were-no.html

The names of thirteen genetic testing companies targeted by the California health department were released today on the agency's website.

CGC Genetics, deCODEme, Gene Essence, Knome, New Hope Medical, Salugen, Smart Genetics, and Suracell were issued cease-and-desist letters two weeks ago along with five companies Wired.com had previously confirmed, Navigenics, 23andMe, DNATraits, HairDX, and Sciona.
The latest announcement means that all three high-profile genome scanning companies -- deCODEme, Navigenics, and 23andMe -- received notices from the state.

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/06/california-reve.html

A Changing Portrait Of DNA

Beyond the Double Helix

Since Watson and Crick discovered DNA's structure in 1953, scientists have realized the double helix is only one part of our genetic makeup. The latest portrait of our basing building blocks.

By Mary Carmichael NEWSWEEK
Dec 10, 2007 Issue

Four years ago, a Duke University biologist named Randy Jirtle began an elegant little experiment that would ultimately lead him to confront one of life's biggest mysteries. He started with two groups of mice that gave birth to sets of identical babies carrying the same genes. The babies were raised the same way from birth. They should have looked alike but instead, they barely looked related. In the first group, the babies were overweight, prone to diabetes and cancer and covered in fur the color of rancid butter. The mice in the second group were beautiful: lean, healthy, brown. Same nature, same nurture, radically different outcomes. What was going on in there?

The difference, it turned out, wasn't due to the mice's genetic code, nor was it due to the environment. It lay instead in a mechanism that was mediating between the two. A gene in the sickly yellow babies was making a disease-causing protein called Agouti, which also affects coat color. The brown babies had the same gene, but it wasn't making much of anything. It had mostly stopped working. The brown babies' mothers had eaten a special diet during pregnancy: one rich in folic acid, which floods the body with tiny four-atom configurations called methyl groups. These methyl groups had infiltrated the growing brown mouse embryos and latched onto the flawed gene, shutting it down. This was the solution to the mystery: Jirtle had vividly illustrated why, at the biochemical level, the genetic sequence alone doesn't always equal destiny. Four humble atoms had been enough to override a serious defect in the brown babies' genomes. And what was true of the mice turned out to be true of men: there is much more to our nature than the plans laid in the genetic code.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/73355

biology,