Top

Published in:

01-10-2011 | Original Research

Media Coverage of Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing

Authors: John Lynch, Ashley Parrott, Robert J. Hopkin, Melanie Myers

Published in: Journal of Genetic Counseling | Issue 5/2011

Abstract

Media coverage of Direct-to-Consumer (DTC) genetic testing shapes public perception of such testing. The purpose of this study was to determine and assess the themes presented by U.S. news media regarding DTC genetic testing. We performed a Lexis-Nexis search with the keywords “Direct-to-Consumer” and “genetic test” for news stories published from 2006–2009. The sample was coded on themes of genetic determinism, privacy, discrimination, validity, regulation, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA), utility, and cost. Ninety-two news stories were included. Stories displayed moderate genetic determinism and were neutral about validity and utility. Stories indicated that insurance and employers were the most likely sources of discrimination, yet identified the physicians and DTC companies as groups most likely to violate privacy. Stories claimed lack of regulation would harm consumers, but most post-GINA stories did not discuss the law. The costs of tests were frequently included. The results of this study show a broad range of views toward DTC genetic testing and its potential impacts. The genetics community should be aware that the public has been exposed to multiple views of DTC genetic testing when discussing these tests.

American College of Medical Genetics. (2008). ACMG statement on direct-to-consumer genetic testing. American College of Medical Genetics. Retrieved from http://www.acmg.net//

American Society of Human Genetics. (2007). ASHG statement on direct-to-consumer genetic testing in the united states. American Journal of Human Genetics, 81, 635–637.CrossRef

Bevan, J. L., Lynch, J. A., Dubriwny, T. N., Harris, T. M., Achter, P. J., Reeder, A. L., et al. (2003). Informed lay preferences for delivery of racially varied pharmacogenomics. Genetics in Medicine, 5, 393–399.PubMedCrossRef

Bloss, C. S., Schork, N. J., & Topol, E. J. (2011). Effect of direct-to-consumer genomewide profiling to assess disease risk. The New England Journal of Medicine, 364, 524–534.PubMedCrossRef

Caulfield, T., & Bubela, T. (2004). Media representation of genetic discoveries: hype in the headlines? Health Law Review, 12, 53–61.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2003). Genetic testing for breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility: Evaluating direct-to-consumer marketing—Atlanta, Denver, Raleigh-Durham, and Seattle. MMWR, 53, 603–606.

Clayton, E. W. (2002). The complex relationship of genetics, groups, and health: what it means for public health. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 30, 290–297.CrossRef

Clayton, E. W. (2003). Ethical, legal, and social implications of genomic medicine. The New England Journal of Medicine, 349, 562–269.PubMedCrossRef

Goddard, K. A., Moore, C., Ottman, D., Szegda, K. L., Bradley, L., & Khoury, M. J. (2006). Awareness and use of direct-to-consumer nutrigenomic tests, United States. Genetics in Medicine, 9, 510–517.CrossRef

Gollust, S. E., Hull, S. C., & Wilfond, B. S. (2002). Limitations of direct-to-consumer advertising for clinical genetic testing. Journal of the American Medical Association, 288, 1762–1767.PubMedCrossRef

Gollust, S., Wilfond, B. S., & Hull, S. C. (2003). Direct-to-consumer sales of genetic services on the Internet. Genetics in Medicine, 5, 332–337.PubMedCrossRef

Haga, S. B., Kjoury, M. J., & Burke, W. (2003). Genomic profiling to promote a healthy lifestyle: not ready for prime time. Nature Genetics, 34, 347–350.PubMedCrossRef

Hagreaves, I., Lewis, J., & Spears, T. (2003). Towards a better map: Science, the public and the media. United Kingdom: Economic and Social Research Council.

Hall, M. A., & Rich, S. S. (2000). Patients’ fear of genetic discrimination by health insurers: the impact of legal protections. Genetics in Medicine, 2, 214–221.PubMedCrossRef

Hubbard, R., & Wald, E. (1993). Exploding the gene myth. Boston: Beacon.

Hunter, D. J., Kjoury, M. J., & Drazen, J. M. (2008). Letting the genome out of the bottle—will we get our wish? The New England Journal of Medicine, 358, 105–107.PubMedCrossRef

Kuehn, B. M. (2008). Risks and benefits of direct-to-consumer genetic testing remain unclear. Journal of the American Medical Association, 300, 1503–1505.PubMedCrossRef

Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.PubMedCrossRef

Lowery, J. T., Byers, T., Axell, L., Ku, L., & Jacobellis, J. (2008). The impact of direct-to-consumer marketing of cancer genetic testing on women according to their genetic risk. Genetics in Medicine, 10, 888–894.PubMedCrossRef

Lynch, J., & Condit, C. M. (2006). Genes and race in the news: a test of competing theories of news coverage. American Journal of Health Behavior, 30, 125–35.PubMed

McCabe, L. L., & McCabe, R. B. (2004). Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: access and marketing. Genetics in Medicine, 6, 58–59.PubMedCrossRef

McCabe, L. L., & McCabe, R. B. (2008). DNA: Promise and peril. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Mouchawar, J., Laurion, S., Ritzwoller, D. P., Ellis, J., Kulchak-Rahm, A., & Hensley-Alford, S. (2005). Assessing controversial direct-to-consumer advertising for hereditary breast cancer testing: reactions from women and their physicians in a managed care organization. The American Journal of Managed Care, 11, 601–608.PubMed

Myers, M. F., Chang, M., Jorgensen, C., Whitworth, W., Kassim, S., Litch, J. A., et al. (2006). Genetic testing for susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer: evaluating the impact of a direct-to-consumer marketing campaign on physicians’ knowledge and practices. Genetics in Medicine, 8, 361–370.PubMedCrossRef

Nelkin, D., & Lindee, S. (1995). The DNA mystique: The gene as cultural icon. New York: W.H. Freeman.

Penziner, E., Williams, J. K., Erwin, C., Bombard, Y., Wallis, A., Beglinger, L. J., et al. (2008). Perceptions of discrimination among persons who have undergone predictive testing for Huntington’s disease. American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part B, Neuropsychiatric Genetic, 147, 320–325.CrossRef

Pirzadeh, S., & Pritzlaff, M. (2010). Direct-to-consumer genetic testing and advertising: past, present and future. Community Oncology, 7, 315–320.

Pollack, A. (2008, Aug. 20). California licenses 2 companies to offer gene services. The New York Times, p. C3.

Ries, N. M., & Castle, D. (2008). Nutrigenomics and ethics interface: direct-to-consumer services and commercial aspects. A Journal of Integrative Biology, 12, 245–250.CrossRef

Silva, V. T. (2005). In the beginning was the gene: the hegemony of genetic thinking in contemporary culture. Communication Theory, 15, 100–123.CrossRef

United States Government Accountability Office. (2006). Nutrigenetic Testing: Tests Purchased From Four Web Sites Mislead Consumers. U.S. Government Accountability Office. Retrieved from http://www.gao.gov/

Wade, C. H., & Wilfond, B. S. (2006). Ethical and clinical practice considerations for genetic counselors related to direct-to-consumer marketing of genetic tests. American Journal of Medical Genetics, 142C, 284–292.PubMedCrossRef

Wilcox, S. (2003). Cultural context and the conventions of science journalism: drama and the contradiction in media coverage of biological ideas about sexuality. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 20, 225–247.CrossRef

Williams-Jones, B. (2006). ‘Be ready against cancer, now’: direct-to-consumer advertising for genetic testing. New Genetics and Society, 25, 89–107.CrossRef

Title: Media Coverage of Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing
Authors: John Lynch
Ashley Parrott
Robert J. Hopkin
Melanie Myers
Publication date: 01-10-2011
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Journal of Genetic Counseling / Issue 5/2011
Print ISSN: 1059-7700
Electronic ISSN: 1573-3599
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-011-9374-9

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Media Coverage of Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing

Abstract

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 5/2011

Breast and Ovarian Cancer: The Forgotten Paternal Contribution

Pediatric Sub-specialist Controversies in the Treatment of Congenital Heart Disease in Trisomy 13 or 18

In Memoriam: Dr. Charles Epstein (1993–2011)

Personality Traits Associated with Genetic Counselor Compassion Fatigue: The Roles of Dispositional Optimism and Locus of Control

Unpacking the Blockers: Understanding Perceptions and Social Constraints of Health Communication in Hereditary Breast Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) Susceptibility Families

Clinical Use of the Surgeon General’s “My Family Health Portrait” (MFHP) Tool: Opinions of Future Health Care Providers