We keep running into the misperception that your DNA is like an engraved encrypted code dictating everything in your life from how long you will live to whether you’ll even have the capacity to remember how to brush your teeth when you are 75. In other words, too many folks think that their DNA and genetic makeup is a formula controlling their destiny. Well, that is really not true. If you believed that you are genetically programmed to a specific destiny then you are forgetting one of the most crucial elements.
Of course your DNA makeup plays a significant role in the “destiny formula” embedded in your genes. But the code you carry in your genes can be active or inactive. In other words, the signals can be turned on and be turned off. And this is precisely where it gets really interesting and really crucial to your health. How can you turn on or turn off the DNA code you carry? While science doesn’t completely understand the mechanism just yet, they have some initial clues and many well-educated hypothesis. So understanding our genetic makeup undoubtedly empowers us to make smarter life choices that impact our lives.
Think of it like playing in a poker game. Imagine that you can see what’s in the deck and make better decisions about how to play your hand. You’ll be at a huge advantage over any other player at the table. You can plan your moves based on the information you have. This is precisely what DNA tests allow you to do — see more of the cards that make up who you are. With that information in hand, you improve your ability to play life with the right strategy.
Let me give you a real example. Say Allison’s TheMakingsofMe DNA Test reveals that she has a genetic tendency to be slightly overweight. She is young now and does not have a weight problem. But now she is aware that she needs to be conscious of her diet choices, exercise and other issues that can affect weight. She is not fated to be heavy. She can take control. But with the same caloric intake as her college roommate who has a genetic tendency to be underweight, she may likely develop a weight problem.
If you are overweight or concerned about becoming overweight, you can log into TheMakingsofMe dashboard and check your Geneometer™ results to see how likely you are to respond to a diet! Moreover, your Geneometer™ results will help you determine which physical activity you are more likely to excel in. This information and more can significantly contribute to your overall wellbeing and sense of control.
1 comment
Larissa says:
Mar 2, 2012
chiz,I would have thought that DNA nueeqsce chimerism in humans is mainly limited to blood cells, as is commonly thought. (Or assumed by those who don’t work on it first-hand!) Incidentally, I mentioned this in my old post Monkey business or is my Uncle also my Dad’: Do you have a reference for your claim the evidence is now clear that mosaicism is common and possibly the norm . (It’s hard to keep abreast of everything. From a very quick look in PubMed, I can see incidental papers on this, but not a key paper. I can vaguely recall something in Nature, but that’s not much use!)I’m not sure this is an issue in the way I think you’re thinking though. Long story short, it seems to come down to simply using the same tissue in the diagnostic test as the test was developed on, or if using a test developed on one tissue and but used in diagnosis using another, bearing this in mind.As long as the same tissue is used as the test was developed on, it’s not an issue. The issue seems to me to be transferring test developed on one tissue to diagnostics based on another, not the mosaicism itself.It will mean that some (rare) disorders that are dependent on mosaicism in specific tissues and only detected this way might be missed, but this should simply mean that there is in effect no test for this disorder, rather than confused tests.Similarly, if the test are unable to detect some types of (somatic) variation then they’d lack predictive power rather than be confused .Which is to say, it could be a limitation in developing tests, but I’m not sure that it’d affect tests once they’re developed, provided the groups doing the diagnostic screens take care to note this when using the diagnostic on a test based on a different tissue that the initial screen was developed from.I hope I’m being clear enough.There is the opposite problem of mosaicism the sampled tissue (associated unrelated disorders to that being tested) in throwing off the tests , which I’d like to think amounts to just another source of noise in developing the test. (If it’s that common that it’s a nuisance it ought to show up, etc.)Or are you thinking of something else again?!
While I’m writing, another thing I’d watch out for is what’s measured in the research reports: differences occurring at the RNA level may tie in with epigenetic heterogeneity rather than DNA nueeqsce mosaicism.