Institute For The Future

Shopping for Your Genome

I spent the last couple days at the Personalized Medicine World Conference and one of the most intriguing companies I encountered was a small startup called HolGenTech, which aims to combine genetic data and mobile devices to give people just-in-time recommendations about what they should and shouldn't consume. It's an interesting concept--nutrigenomics meets mobile computing--but I'm skeptical that, in the near-term, genetic research will be able to offer the sort of value the company claims it will offer to the end user. At the same time, their effort to rush to market highlights the gulf between what consumers and entrepreneurs hope breakthroughs in genetics (and neuroscience) will offer and what may actually be scientifically valid.

 

In brief, HolGenTech's service works as follows:

 

The PGA [Personal Genome Assistant--marketing speak for a smart phone] uses a device’s bar code reader to capture product ingredient information and respond with personalized screens of recommendation advice and ratings that display on a scale of -10 to +10, corresponding to analysis of integrated data from multiple sources. The PGA user can automatically and immediately identify the personalized prevention efficacy of any product under consideration, as long as the product has a bar code for ingredients. Consumers are equipped to make quick, yet thorough, product comparisons that take into consideration personal health preferences and genomic information with special attention to a disease, syndrome, or health condition they wish to improve.

 

 

And this sounds great--and extremely useful. In their demo video, however, they inadvertently showcase just how far they are from delivering on this claim. Using a DNA sample from a writer, they note that she is lactose intolerant and then go onto show how, by taking pictures of different product barcodes, she can be told which products might and might not be problematic for this condition. It's not at all clear why taking a picture of a barcode would be simpler than reading a list of ingredients--something people with food allergies do quickly all the time--or, for that matter, why someone would need a genetic scan to know that they have lactose intolerance issues.

 

The reason, I imagine, that these recommendations fall so flat is that conclusions in genetic research remains frustratingly vague and inconclusive, despite huge advances in genetic sequencing and analysis. In a recent paper in Nature (subscription required), a group of genetics researchers found that direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies gave mostly contradictory results. The testing services often disagreed about what one's genes might mean, in a general sense, about whether her lifetime risk of developing a disease might be above or below average based on her genetics. In that context, delivering daily, well-supported recommendations about specific products and services seems like a pipe-dream.

 

So why am I intrigued by a pipe-dream? Because HolGenTech represents what we hope genetics can give us. Genetics, neuroscience, and several other fields in health and health care are making hugely fast advances, in terms of basic science research. And that research is yielding complex, intriguing findings--most of which will take a decade or more to move into mainstream products and services.

 

It's this latter point--speeding the pace of research getting out of laboratory settings and into the hands of everyday people--that I think will form the core of an enormous challenge in health and health care in the coming decade. Because I do think there's demand to try to apply all of this research in services like HolGenTech--even if no one yet knows how to do it in a thoughtful way.