Anderson’s “Your DNA, Decoded”, Article Review Example

Anderson’s “Your DNA, Decoded,” sheds light on the scientific advancement within the field of genetics. Initially, researchers were unraveling the 6 billion intricate components of the human genome in order to eradicate deadly diseases (Anderson, 2015). The genome is now being utilized to anticipate ones level of health based on the inheritance of certain traits and characteristics. Those with access to these personal genetic instruction manuals, have found ways to avoid health scares, alleviate minor ailments, and understand the reasons behind their individual predispositions. As the rate of DNA decoding increases with technological advancement, the cost to obtain this personal genetic blueprint decreases. Changes in health care costs might also result as individual health care needs change (Anderson, 2015). A collaboration between insurance companies and geneticists might become the future in health care initiatives. Much of what Henry Gates has uncovered proves radically progressive, but there is an overwhelming theme of uncertainty requiring further testing and manipulation of variables that are simply outside our control.

Uncovering individual genome characteristics has provided evidence regarding past, current, and future health implications. Mapping ancestry and tracing lineage has become a popular endeavor in today’s society (Anderson, 2015). People want answers; specifically one that might prevent a heart attack at the age of 50. Many celebrities have gained access to this human genome and Gate’s has facilitate decoding for a wide variety of clientele. Of course, those who can afford the luxury at this point in time will make sure individual health is intact and can be maintained in the future. Gates was able to use his decoding process to uncover information and his mother and how his family lineage has aligned. The inherited link between a parent’s traits and their children is undeniable. The dominant and recessive gene pool is considered highly in the decoding process. In addition to the biological evidence, environment plays a major role in characteristic determination. Mike Spear’s human genome predicted a reduced risk of developing asthma, yet he has been diagnosed as asthmatic for years (Anderson, 2015). This asthmatic trait might be considered a result of exposure to poor environmental conditions; data that should not be ignored in a person’s health analysis. Environmental stressors, family dynamics, substance abuse issues may all exasperate one’s psychological well-being resulting in depression or anxiety disorders not observed in our genetic traits initially. Anxiety; described as fear of the future is often accompanied with increased heart rate, irritable bowel, sweating etc. This response is the body’s reaction to dealing with anxious thoughts or feelings. These symptoms, if left untreated, could produce long term health problems. Raise heart rate caused by stress may be linked to heart attacks. Irritable bowel movements may result in nutrient loss over time. The brain is powerful enough to illicit physical responses to our environment. Onset of an anxiety disorder may be predictable in some cases, but chances are this is a learned response. The argument of Nature versus Nurture may provide useful in determining acquired trait characteristics. Nature refers to the natural biological wiring that we inherit and are born with. Nurture, on the other hand, is learned through exposure to external stimuli. These are two very different views and occur on opposite sides of the spectrum. In the midst of both these theories, lies room for exploration of psychoanalysis, psychological, and humanist viewpoints. All of which should be utilized until a more exact approach to understanding the entirety of the human genome is reached.

I find this type of scientific advancement intriguing. If decoding DNA provides some insight regarding the evolution of certain cancers, or other harmful life-threatening diseases, I am on board. My fear is the knowledge gap regarding the human genome. Those who don’t consider the “nurture” point of view might become too reliant on this personalized blueprint and disregard the possibility that we are evolving every day as human beings. If a person learns they have a low risk for developing colon cancer, they might not go for their annual colonoscopy. They assume they are not a candidate for this type of cancer; forgetting external variables outside of their genetic makeup might have altered their ability to maintain their diagnosed “low risk.” We are products of our environment; we come in contact with unknown variables every day and adapt accordingly. As Anderson discusses, health care costs will change drastically. Those who are not at risk for disease or health impairment would likely look to spend less money on insurance plans. This eventual decrease in financial contribution will impose a greater financial burden for those who are looking into preventative medicine, rehabs, alternative medical solutions based on their projected health. It seems that a partnership between insurance companies and genetic specialists is on the horizon. Many people will discover a renewed heath awareness that holds each person individually responsible for their livelihood.

References

Anderson, M. (2010, August). Your DNA, Decoded. Sky Magazine, 3.

Hvistendahl, M. (2011). Unnatural selection: Choosing boys over girls, and the Consequences of a world full of men. New York: Public Affairs.