Posts Tagged ‘economics’


The  genetics of economics and economics of genetics are really freaky topics.

On the one hand, we spend most of our lives making economic decisions … how to spend time? money? affection? You know, “He’s cute, but has a lame job” and, “I feel like I’m getting a better deal at Five Guys because they give away the peanuts for free.” Genetic research seems to be “worth it” because variation in genetic data might underpin variation in economic behavior (particularly in the healthcare marketplace).

On the other hand, genetic data seems to have little or no economic face value. I mean, they are practically giving the data away at $100 for your SNP-ome and $1,000 for your full genome.

So it seems that consumers are now part of an experiment where they may freely access their personal genetic information and try to figure out how to use it in some sort of economically advantageous way. Meanwhile scientists can (with consent) meta-analytically track the genotypes of these consumers and discover what genotypes are associated with good economic decisions. It’s freaky. It’s fascinating. It’s big data. Whatever.

The downside to “consumer as guinea pig” is that the free marketplace is full of liars and exploiters, and will soon be awash in every sort of hokey “geno-” this and “geno-” and “g’s” fused with all sorts of words that begin with “en”. I mean, have you ever not been paralyzed in the salad dressing aisle? Do we really need “specially formulated for rs1234567 AA” geno-dressings?

Which is why I really think anyone who describes himself as a genoeconomist and founder of a gentrepreneurship consortium, really needs to take it down a couple of notches. This type of self-branding is what the liars and exploiters do.

Hundreds of millions of people are desperately looking for work. The liars and exploiters have wrecked the global economy for decades to come. People are suffering. The publication of meta-analytic studies that show that self-employment, while somewhat heritable, is a complex polygenic trait (um, no shit) feels to me like an insensitive slap in the face to people who are unemployed through no fault of their own.

Rant over.

Read Full Post »


Read Full Post »

American Omic


Read Full Post »


Sign on the window reads, “10% off for rs1800497 TT“ … on account of the way their DRD2 receptors seem to be less responsive … which, naturally, makes them prone to needing to drink (buy) more to feel the same pleasure as CC people. It’s just the free market at work right?

Read Full Post »

Over at Open Secrets, there are some great tools to “… investigate the cash flowing from well-heeled special interests within the health industries to your representatives, the committee members with the most power to shape the legislation …”

A big money political circus with $500 million spent on lobbying in 2010 alone!  Can a wave of new personal informatic and genomic tools take root and grow amidst a corporate money-fueled politicized regulatory environment?  I hope so, but the paradigm shift to personalized-genomic-medicine definitely stirs up some thorny conflicts between our individual rights of freedom, privacy and access to healthcare vs. the profit models of corporations vs. government policy.

The info graphic is here at Many Eyes.  Here is a related post on possible innovation-crushing regulation and below is a video summary of how “We the People” lost control of our democratic process.

Read Full Post »

… from The Big Picture

Read Full Post »


… from the debunking analysis:

The key comparison here comes from the two extremes: 2 alleles vs. 0. People with 2 alleles are 4 percentage points (more precisely, 3.6 percentage points) more likely to report themselves as very satisfied with their lives. The standard error of this difference in proportions is sqrt(.41*(1-.41)/862+.37*(1-.37)/509) = 0.027, so the difference is not statistically significant at a conventional level.

Enhanced by Zemantamore on this totally over-hyped gene here.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »