Visit our website
New America Cypbersecurity Initiative
New America Cypbersecurity Initiative
MIT Technology Review
MIT Technology Review
io9
io9
Techdirt
Techdirt
Knowledge@Wharton
Knowledge@Wharton
Bioscience Technology
Bioscience Technology
redOrbit
redOrbit
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
Technology & Marketing Law Blog
Popular Science Blog
Popular Science Blog
Pew Research Center
Pew Research Center
Genomics Law Report
Genomics Law Report
Science 2.0
Science 2.0
The Guardian Headquarters
The Guardian Headquarters
Genetic Literacy Project
Genetic Literacy Project
Disclaimer

Statements posted on this blog represent the views of individual authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Center for Law Science & Innovation (which does not take positions on policy issues) or of the Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law or Arizona State University.

Tuesday Triple Trivia Tease for October 8, 2013

3 questions. 3 hints. 3 answers. Every Tuesday.

This week’s theme: genetics.

1. What seems to be “missing” in the quest for answers relating to autism?

Hint:

Answer: researchers have discovered that people with autism appear more prone to gene deletions, especially those relating to autophagy, a mechanism that encourages healthy cells.  While the findings require further assessment, the study provides an insightful perspective.

2. Which body politic is “closed for business” when it comes to genetic testing?

Hint: for a change, it’s not the Feds.

Answer: a Maryland law effectively bans direct to consumer genetic test kits, leaving residents of that state in the dark about their genetic make-up.  Maryland law requires that medical tests are either requested by a medical professional or required by court order.  The underlying reason for the law appears to be lack of accompanied genetic counseling once results are revealed.  While companies like 23andMe offer to connect customers with experienced genetics advisers, the counseling is not automatically included with an individual’s test interpretation.    Read more here.

3. While Maryland is currently closed for business when it comes to in-home genetic testing, it is very much open for business when is comes to DNA testing in what area?

Hint:

Picture

Answer: the Supreme Court in Maryland v. King recently affirmed that the collection of DNA samples from a suspect under arrest for a qualifying serious offense does not violate the Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure.  Law Professor, Elizabeth Joh, lists three concerns about the consequences of the SCOTUS decision, namely, 1) using the collection of DNA to purposely link a suspect to a completely unrelated crime,  2) expanding the law to include less serious offenses; and 3) utilizing the “Terry Stop” ruling (Terry v. Ohio), which applies to investigative identity stops, to collect DNA for the purpose of identification.