EXTRA CREDIT Blog. Up to 4 points toward Midterm Exam.
Extended Deadline May 20, 2013
-->
Are you hardwired to
be a good athlete?
A company called Atlas Sports Genetics offers a test for
variants of the ACTN3 gene, some of which are commonly found in elite- and Olympic
athletes. They test for the gene variants in children younger than 9 years old.
What is your initial reaction to this article? Since this is available “DTC,”
what are possible implications for parents who aren’t as genetically savvy as
you? If you were leaving a comment under the article, what advice would you
give to those who are reading and thinking of trying the test for their
children?
If parents were able to somewhat tell how "sporty" their 9 year old child will be in the future, it will affect the extracurricular activities parents get their children involved in. If results show variations of the ACTN3 gene, parents will sign their children up to play sports at a young age. However, without having these results, perhaps those same parents would first have their children explore different activities and let their children decide the ones they wish to pursue. The article does mention how this detection is not definitive to a future sports career. What happens if a parent steers their child down a path into sports because of their genotype, but their child ends up having no motivation to play a sport? The article states how "this is a tool, not the tool," meaning it tests whether a child will be good or bad at sports, not what specific sport the child will play. So, children with the ACTN3 gene still will have to try many sports until knowing which one they may excel in. This is what most parents have their children do without knowing about their ACTN3 variation, unless a child has a specific sport in mind. This test can show three variants of ACTN3 and each variant has different outcomes such as endurance or power. These narrow sport choices for kids with either just the endurance variant or just the power variant. However, the third variant makes it possible that a child could excel in either an endurance or a power sport. The fact that this is a saliva test and has no side affects, I would probably have my children tested, but still give them the option to pursue whatever activities they decide. If 50% of muscle strength is determined by genetic factors, then perhaps these tests should only predict that 50% of muscle strength. The remaining 50% depends on how much muscle strength the child gains through physical/environmental activity throughout life. For parents that are thinking of testing their child for this gene, keep in mind that the results are not definitive. The lack of alpha-actinin-3 protein does result in muscles that don't work as well and prevent people to reaching high power performance levels. However, it is unknown whether the association between the protein and muscle activity is about muscle fatigue or contractile strength. There are details behind this test that still need to be figured out.
ReplyDeleteThe screening for this "athletic" gene is a test that parent's should definitely be cautious about. The ACTN3 variation as mentioned in the article is not a definite indicator of someone's athletic ability it just shows up in Olympic athletes the direct association with performance hasn't even been linked yet. It even says specifically that the specific function of this variation hasn't even been determined. I think testing for this variation would be a waste of time and money as it is not even a surer fire indicator of anything other than olympic athletes have it. I think also tailoring your children's sports based on a test is unfair to the decision of the hold to choose what extracurriculars they want to participate in. Just because you may think based off this test their might be a slight chance your child will be an Olympic sprinter doesn't guarantee anything. I think the distinction between association and direct causation needs to be specifically worded so that curious parents know exactly what they are getting themselves into.
ReplyDeleteAs an athlete it is important for people to understand that it’s not just one gene or one trait that makes a person a good athlete. This gene mentioned in the article, ACTN3, is believed to be linked with high speeds of muscle contractions. The article mentions this and doesn’t want people to let this test be the end all be all, but instead a tool for parents to use to help pick a sport for their child. However just because a 9 year old doesn’t have this specific gene doesn’t mean that in 15 years after training to be a sprinter, that they won’t develop explosive muscles. In fact there may be another gene that deals with a similar action. There is not one specific gene that makes all good athletes. Every athlete brings something different to the table: hard work, determination, work ethic, skill, intelligence, enjoyment, leadership, etc. This article acknowledges again that it’s not the only indicator of athleticism but if it doesn’t make a difference and can’t predict the future, I’m worried that the way it is advertised, what the media does with it, and what mis-informed parents do with this information may negatively impact the child. Some ways I can see this test negatively impacting kids is: if the kid tests positive for the gene parents may force the child into a sport that they don’t like, if they test positive a parent may burn their kid out by making them work too hard, if the child tests negative a parent could crush a child’s dream of playing professionally, and if they test negative a parent may make a child quit playing sports.
ReplyDeleteBecause this test is a Direct to Consumer test, and probably no medical doctor is associated with the test and interpreting results, the chances of this test being valid are slim to none. Even the evidence of this gene being correlated to Olympic athletes is fishy. The article says, “The protein helps muscles contract powerfully at high speeds, which may explain why the combination of ACTN3 variants that produce it has been found in Olympic sprinters.” The evidence the article uses is not so evident. It says above that it may explain ACTN3 being found in Olympic sprinters. If there was a study done and more research about this gene then maybe it would make some more sense. So not only is there no doctor involved but there isn’t really any official correlation between this gene and being an Olympic athlete just yet. As we learned in class most DTC companies use family history and characteristics to make claims and most of the time they are not consistent, and the reason is that they probably aren’t actually looking at a person’s genetic material.
To the company’s president’s credit, Kevin Reilly, he never makes any outlandish claims. He says the test is a tool to help parents pick the best sport for their child. However because of the sheer lack of evidence and correlation between the gene and athleticism it’s important to understand what this DTC is really trying to do. The ultimate goal of this genetic test is not to inform kids and parents about athleticism, it’s goal is to make money.
Anthony points out an important factor parents should keep in mind - the media. We saw what happened when the media got ahold of the "cheating gene" study. The media blew this idea way out of proportion. Parents must remember that these studies often only can prove a correlation, NOT a direct causation. Remember what the interviewee in the article said, that multiple genes have been discovered to play a role in a person's athletic performance and they have only scratched the surface of the 20,000 genes in the human genome. Parents must keep themselves well informed and not rely solely on the information provided via DTC.
DeleteThanks for the reply Victoria and you stated your point very eloquently:)I'm starting to become more and more worried with these DTC's and their inability to provide proper information and their hopes to make money
DeleteI think that Atlas Sports Genetics' president, Kevin Reilly said it best,"This is a tool, not the tool." He understands that athletic ability, a broad concept itself, is not determined by a gene, or a handful of genes. It is the combination of genetics, lifestyle choices, effort, and in the case of children, parental guidance. These genes just play a role in the possible trajectory of individual ability. Furthermore, one of the best parts of childhood was participating in the myriad of sports - basketball, swimming, baseball, football, rowing, tennis, etc. - and figuring out in due time, which you are good at and which ones you will never be good at (it was baseball for me). It's almost a rite of passage for kids in elementary school. An overbaring parent (the kind you see getting kicked out of little league games) might force this test upon their kids to see which sport is "best" for them. It's nonsense. Having a gene associated with intelligence does not mean you will grow up a genius - it is the combination of gene and effort, nurture and nature.
ReplyDeleteIf one chooses to take the test for ACTN3 (I don't think I ever could - it reminds me of GATTACA...), they should be advised by the company that it is not a promise of athletic excellence. Since it is a DTC product, and internet shopping is quite easy (and impulsive), I think that people will purchase and use the test as a justification for pushing their children to the extreme. EVERY consumer should understand the implications of having or not having the alpha-actinin-3 protein, and I believe the company has the moral responsibility (if not fiduciary) to keep their consumers well-informed. If I could give any advice to anyone considering purchasing the test, I would say the same thing as the company president: it's a tool and not the only tool - the best one is good, supportive, parenting.
At a first glance, it sounds great to be able to find out if you are born to be an athlete or not through a genetic test. But, according to the article the genetic test should not be considered a definitive tool. It can serve as an indicator, but other factors need to be taken into consideration. The article mentioned that researchers are still unsure as to what association the ACTN3 gene actually has with performance. They mentioned that maybe the difference might only be noticed at the Olympic level, which is irrelevant for nine-year olds or most people at that. So, at the end of the day, this genetic test isn’t really telling you anything and it’s just a waste of money and time. It would be unfair to push your kids towards sports just because they have the gene that produces more proteins but have no personal motivation to play a sport. Just like it would be unfair to try to convince a child who wants to play sports to not do so because his genetic screening results weren’t favorable.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I don’t think I would test my child for this gene. The first reason is that since it’s a direct to consumer test, a doctor doesn’t prescribe the test so I wouldn’t trust its validity. There’s not point in making my child take a test, even though it’s as simple and easy as a saliva swab, if I am not going to trust the results. The other reason is that I would want my child to freely decide what activities interest him or her without having the results of a genetic test to bias his decisions. I don’t think I would want it to bias mine either because even though, I may not really think the test has any validity, it still might bias the activities I choose to enroll my child in. The last reason is that regardless of the results, that does not affect my child’s motivation to want to play sports or not. So, in my opinion, at least at this point in time, I don’t think that the genetic test would be telling me any valuable information so I wouldn’t do it.
I find this subject area particularly interesting because I am an athlete as well as seeking a career as a health professional. First of all, I find it honorable that Atlas Sports Genetics' president, Kevin Reilly stated that this is a tool to determining a child's athletic predisposition, not a definite prediction of athletic ability. As an athlete I know that there are many determinants that mold an athlete into the sport they train for, but also that the general strength all athletes share with being mobile, flexible, powerful, and strong. These general qualities are developed in an athlete from a young age into their professional careers. Overall, there are many environmental factors that contribute to an athletes success that genetics can not control. Family support, individual motivation, excellent coaching and a safe/healthy living environment. The article also mentions that the ACTN3 gene may only be present in Olympic athletes, which there are very few of in the world, so I think this test would only show a significance in very few cases.
ReplyDeleteI recently listening to a BJM podcast that stated the most effective way to determine a child's sporting talent is to physically test their ability. For example, to test whether someone is a sprinter or endurance athlete would be to ask the person to run 100 meter dash and then compare that to their mile time. So my advice to parents thinking about getting this test done for their child would be to save the $149 for a sport sign up fee or athletic gear for your child because in the end the environment that parents provide their child with trumps any genetic testing that might show what sport your child will be good at. Also, it is more than likely that an child being tested for this gene to get a negative result, which could affect the parenting of that child and unfortunately limit their child's participation in sports. And as we all know exercise is important in every child's development.
Here is the link to the podcast by BMJ interviewing Professor Malcolm Collins.
http://podbay.fm/show/330966919/e/1360931464
Although it is interesting from a scientific standpoint, from a family standpoint it seems unnecessary. Part of being a kid is trying different sports and gaining a sense of pride and sense of identity. Children are typically less likely to enjoy a sport when their parents get too involved. There are many parents who dream their children will love and excel in the same sports as they once did and will put too much pressure on their children. This makes the child feel like they cannot be anything less than perfect and can negatively impact development. Marketing a genetic test to determine a child's athletic abilities may attract parents like these, and undesired results may disturb the parent-child relationship. In a healthy family relationship where the child is given room to grow into their own person, there just isn't a need for genetically determining athletic ability.
ReplyDeleteBecause this test is marketed directly to the consumer instead of being marketed through physicians, there is potential for this test to be misused. Some parents might think that this test will predict whether or not their child is going to be a professional athlete because many of the studies that the test is based on are studies of Olympic or professional athletes. However, this test is not designed to do that; many other factors influence a child's overall success in sports, such as motivation, work-ethic, and attitude.
It is important for parents considering to use this genetic test to thoroughly evaluate their motivation behind testing. For the parents who are using this test as a guideline to help pick a sport most appropriate for their child, with their motivation being that they want to ensure a sense of pride and accomplishment in a sport as opposed to a sense of failure and defeat, it is important that they talk with a knowledgeable genetic counselor throughout the entire process. The genetic counselor will help to make sure that the parents understand the results and understand what to make of them. The genetic counselor will also make sure that the parent knows the limitations of the test before having it done. Ultimately, having a good relationship with the genetic counselor will help the parents make the most of the results.
The company called Atlas Sports Genetics is in place to provide genetic testing to children under nine years old in order to identify genetic advantage in an individual. They look only at genetic markers, specifically the ACTN3 gene, to determine if the individual has a two copies of the X variant, a single copy of the X and a single copy of the R variant, or two copies of the R variant. Each pair of results would indicate that the child would be genetically constructed to be more talented in one kind of sport over another. On the company website, there is a list of bullet points for which the company views this genetic test as an advantage. They mention that it is safe to use on the youngest of athletes because it is an easy, non-invasive sampling method, and it gives parents and coaches a valuable outline for training and conditioning programs to best fit the predisposition of the individual.
ReplyDeleteMy initial reaction to this testing was of an impressive nature because of the simple surprise of such an advanced discovery. I find it incredible that technology has evolved so far as to be able to detect this kind of predisposition, but it also brings the question of ethical obligation into study. I understand the company's testimonials when they point out that the results have helped change extra-curricular activities to be more in line with test results, but I do not think that such testing should be done until the child reaches the age of consent. There will always be a "best" and a "worst" on any athletic team. No child should avoid a sport because they are less genetically advantaged than others. Sometimes the most successful individuals are the ones that have the unstoppable desire more rather than the ones who have a special advantage. Part of being human is making mistakes and learning to overcome life's hardest challenges, and so I think that taking away a child's dreams to be a professional athlete is, in a sense, taking away their humanity.
Possible implications of this test being direct-to-consumer could definitely result with a lack of a medical professional present to accurately interpret the results of such a test. An article we studied earlier in the class mentioned that "more than a third of U.S. adults have limited health literacy, and only approximately 12% have the proficient health literacy skills needed to understand much health information." This quote shows that even with valid results, the majority of the population doesnt have the education and medical knowledge to comprehend the implications. In addition, there are many points which even question the validity of the test itself. Different labs have proven to distribute different results indicating if the individual has a low, medium, or high risk of developing a disease, so maybe the first order of business would be to look and compare the standards and qualifications of each lab testing company.
For the parents of this generation, I would tell you to enroll your child in any sport your child asks you to participate in, because regardless of whether he/she is genetically advantaged, working hard at something you love is what will ultimately produce the best results. For the parents that disagree with this notion, I would recommend that you at least meet with a genetic couselor to discuss your the process and the possible implications of your test before it is done.
This study worries me for a variety of reasons. First of all, I would be afraid that testing for this "athlete" gene would ingrain the thought in the minds of children that athletic abilities are just a direct measure of genetic expression, specifically to the gene ACTN3. As someone who is a fan of sports, hard work, and competition, it seems insulting to even consider the fact that athletic capabilities can just be boiled down to genetics.
ReplyDeleteHowever, on the other hand, it would be foolish to not realize how influential genes are when it comes to sport capabilities. Despite this, as the study says, the gene is just an indicator of the child's athletic predisposition, and other factors such as training, drive, and practice also play a huge part to how successful a child will be from an athletic point of view.
Not to mention the fact that sports are not all about physicality, but that athletic mental capabilities are just as important too. Just because a test indicates that a child would be good at football or soccer does not mean that they would actually excel in an actual game or match, if that person does not know what the best play to run during stressful pressure moments.
A word of advice that I would remind parents before testing their children is that though it is interesting to know what the genetics are, that one must not forget the important part about sports and competition, and that is the enjoyment and love one has when they're playing. Whether it is a casual game of tennis amongst friends, or the NFL superbowl, players and fans alike just want to see a healthy competitive and fun game based on will, determination, and heart and at this point, the genetics behind it all would not matter unless you're enjoying the sport that you're participating in.
I think the option of screening for the ACTN3 gene is very daunting and makes me nervous to hear in a way. I think that, like I have said in previous posts and like many people have already posted, having a test for a certain "athletic gene" can tremendously influence on how a parent could possibly raise their child. Not that it would be all negative outcomes for this, but I think that many, many people today are not educated correctly on topics such as these in genetics research. And I truly believe that if there was a test for a certain ACTN3 gene that denotes athleticism, thousands of parents would flock to get the test for it in their children. If, let's say, a child tested negative for the gene, many parents might believe then that the child would not be able to do well in sports and therefore discourage any type of that activity because it would be "a waste of time." If the test came out positive, the parent might go and very heavily push sports on their child, thinking that they are going to be a famous athlete. This could be really detrimental to the child with the intense pressure to succeed in sports just because they have a certain "athletic gene," even if the child truly does not want to even play sports. It could stop them from doing many things they enjoy outside of athletics such as music or art, etc.
ReplyDeleteI think my advice to all the people reading the article is to look deeper into things instead of how they just appear on the surface. Just like we looked at in class with the "cheating gene," the media among other groups of people and companies are fans of manipulating scientific findings to make them more "interesting" and eye catching. If we see that there's a gene that many olympic athletes share, we automatically call it something like "an athletic gene," but it may not actually be a gene that automatically denotes the person as an amazing athlete. There may be many other factors, environmental, social, etc., that play into whether a person is or is not good at sports. I think that a person's personality, will power and passion are much more essential to their ability to play well than just having this ACTN3 gene.
It really concerns me when media outlets sometimes stretch information to be something other than it is. Even just adding a word or two to what was actually said can change the meaning drastically. Making assumptions that the gene for less pair bonding does not equate to cheating and being unfaithful 100% of the time for example, and similarly I think that having this ACTN3 gene does not equate to winning a gold medal in the Olympics in the future. My advice would be to always look at these articles and news media with a mindset that not everything that is said is 100% accurate and true.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteMy initial reaction to this article: The idea of using the ACTN3 gene test as a tool to determine what sports a child will be good at frightens me. I don't understand why anyone would even come up with such a thing. This 'need' to know certain things before we are supposed to know is an uncomfortable topic for me. I agree that it may be important to know certain things about one's genes as it relates to family medical history for disease prevention, but not this. I would never do such a test on my child because I feel there is no point. Any parent who has a vision of their child being an elite sports champion before he/she is even at an age where they can show preferences or skills, has a bit of a controlling problem. Good luck to that child. I still would not agree with it even if a parent saw that their child took interest in a certain area. Life comes with lots of lessons, and children learn through their successions and down-falls.
ReplyDeleteI slightly agree with one point that the article mentioned. "It's a question of their motivation, it's a tool not the tool". I am hesitant to say I fully agree because I don't think it should be a tool at all. However, I think that it's important for parents to motivate their children in the way they think is best for them before they have any idea for themselves. This doesn't need to include genetic testing for certain athletic traits. The child will determine his or her preferences based on what he or she is good at (at a certain age after trying lots of things), and the parent should help to motivate the child.
I agree with the post above by Jennifer. There are many genetic tests and it is reasonable for informed people to make decisions by using the results for preventative measures. For example, BRCA1/2 testing is important because then people can make informed decisions for preventative measures. However, what are the risks for not knowing if your child has the ACTN3 gene? Atlas Sports Genetics website says that it can be "valuable in outlining the training and conditioning programs necessary for athletic and sport development". They do not mention any risk for not knowing. It is not something we could think of preventative measures for. This is just unnecessary information that can do more harm than good. The risk of this DTC product being placed is that the parents who find out that their child does not have the ACTN3 gene will more likely not motivate their child to do physical activity and can possibly decrease their health since everybody should have physical activity anyway.
ReplyDeleteMy advice to those parents reading this article and thinking about testing their children is to not do it because this test is unnecessary. There are other methods to find out what your child is good at and more importantly what your child is passionate in doing. The most basic way to do a "test" is to let your child experience the different kinds of sports or hobbies. Elementary to High school pretty much already does this kind of thing. Just by observing how your child is doing in school: Are they good at math? Do they really like to participate in gym class? Are they really passionate of a cause run by student clubs? And for example, if a parent sees that their child is really into sports, that is when the parent can find ways in "outlining the training and conditional programs" for their child to excel assuming that it is what their child wants. If the parents do decide to do the test, it is important for them to understand that these tests do not write the final results. In other words, if the child has the ACTN3 gene, that does not mean that they will be Olympians. There are epigenetic factors that go into it.
If this DTC product actually gets popular, the next thing could be testing for a doctor gene or a lawyer gene or an artistic gene. We could be getting into a world where our children will already have their destined career paths right when they are born and tested. Is that where we want to be?
I think that this test could put unnecessary pressures on a child to be success in a specific sport. Children already have a lot of pressure put on them to succeed in sports and this test will cause more pressure. Many parents may read to much into this test and take it as a definite that their children will succeed in sports because they tested for this gene. If a child tested positive for this gene, parents may force their child to play a sport they do not like and have no desire to play. For example, a child who has two copies of the X variant from both parents may want to play soccer. However, it suggests that those who have the two copies from their parents don’t make alpha-actinin-3 and would be best suited to play sports like swimming, cross-country skiing, and distance running. Knowing this a parent may persuade or force the child to swim instead of playing soccer like they wanted. The child could end up loving swimming but all the pressure, practice, time commitment, and dedication that it takes to become an elite athlete could take its toll on the child. It could ultimately cause burnout and make the child quit the sport when the could have possibly been very successful.
ReplyDeleteAnother problem that could happen because of this test is that if a child does not test positive for the gene the parents may not allow the child to play a sport at all. If they do not have the gene they may believe that there is no way their child will be successful in the future. They may not see the point in investing all the money that comes along with playing a sport. Equipment and traveling for sports can cost a lot of money and some parents may not see the benefit of having their child play a sport that they will not excel at in the future. I think it is important to let a child try may different sports and activities to find out for themselves what they enjoy. A genetic test should not dictate what sport a child should be involved in. They should join a sport for the joy of playing.
I must admit that the testing of the ACTN3 gene is pretty cool and interesting from just a general standpoint and the fact that they have associated this particular gene to have indicate a presence of a protein which, ultimately, help muscles contract forcefully with speed and power. It would be interesting to find out whether your son or daughter has this gene for the simple purpose of knowing, but I am very skeptical to believe that it will outline your child's future in sports. I think the article does a great job in making it extremely clear that "it is simply a tool, not THE tool." In other words, I do not believe Atlas Sports Genetics are making any claims stating that if you have this gene, then you will be a professional athlete in the future. However, I am sure that many people will fall into this trap of not fully understanding the gene before getting it testing with hopes that their child will be a star athlete.
ReplyDeleteAside from the gene, I believe a child's upbringing is what truly motivates a child to enjoy and pursue a certain sport. If a child grows up watching football with his/her family, and has friends who also enjoy and play football, then I believe that the child will have a steeper inclination to pursue football. If this gene was actually a precise indicator of athletic abilities (which it is not), then there is no argument that it would be of some help to have some inherited "talent". However, it has been debated just how far talent can drive an individual in the particular field that person is talented in. Besides "talent," it is obvious that today's star athletes are professionals because they have proper work ethic, motivation, and passion for what they do. If an individual is talented, but does not have a passion or drive to pursue a sport, then he/she will not.
As I mentioned earlier, I really do think the fact that they have discovered this gene for testing is fascinating. However, the results of these tests should not be seen as determinants by parents that their child is going to be a professional athlete in the future by any means. For educational purposes, I think this testing could be useful. Essentially though, I believe that becoming a professional competitive athlete requires much more than the presence of a single gene and parents should fully understand the essence of the ACTN3 gene (or ACE gene) before having their child tested.
As I read the article my attention becomes most focused on a single line, "This is a tool, not the tool." The ACTN3 gene is an indicator of muscle protein, thus giving some idea of whether or not a given child is predisposed to develop into an "athlete." It seems appealing at just $149 to have this test performed in order to get a better indicator of whether or not you should put more or less stock into your child's athletic endeavors. However, within this lies many issues. Sports do so much more than simply allow a child to improve in that particular sport. Team-building, confidence gains, critical thinking, etc. are associated with playing sports as well. If a child wants to shoot for the stars and give a certain sport everything they've got, who is to say there will not be secondary gains achieved through this endeavor, even if the child does not reach the professional level.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, it is human nature for people to put "all their eggs in one basket," even if they do not mean to. As the article stresses, this is only one indicator, and is not 1005 accurate. In fact, the article even states that "Nobody knows the answer for sure and it depends on how specifically you define athletic ability" when asked to what extent do genes determine athletic ability. So, so much more goes into being a good athlete, not just "braun." Critical thinking skills and being able to understand the sport, along with the drive and determination to excel is equally as important. It is for this reason that I believe the test to not be something parents should strongly consider when trying to determine their child's prospect for being a great athlete.
I completely agree with my classmate Chris's response to this article. Upon reading it I immediately thought about all that I have learned from participating in sports apart from the physical skills of the sport. I personally was involved in individual and team sports starting at a very young age. While I by no means became the best at the sports I played (I would not even go as far to as to say I was good at some of them) I reaped many benefits from having been involved in them. I am not an "athlete" when it comes to cricket but I did learn how to be patient, how to think critically, and to work in a team while I played cricket. Chris makes an excellent argument to point out that while the test is appealing, parents and individuals must be able to look past merely one indicator that seemingly claims to define "athletic". Involvement in physical activity reaches beyond the realms of exercise and may be attributed to mental health as well as character development.
DeleteAfter reading the article regarding the ACTN3, I believe that the test to see if children have this gene is not worth it and will actually be more negative than positive. The gene can be used to detect a child's physical and athletic ability early on since this protein helps muscles contract powerfully at high speeds. While initially it may seem like a good idea to get this test done, it doesn't seem necessary in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteIf a child is found to not have this particular gene, then parents might discourage their child from partaking in any sport and might "give up". Any sport can be performed if a child is trained properly and has enough motivation. The article does mention that it is simply a "tool" and should not be used to see if a child will be good or bad at sports. However, the general public may not completely understand this and might take the test to literally mean the child can or can not compete in sports.
If the child is found to have this gene, he or she might now have increased pressure and stress to perform and this can affect mental health. Sports should be done by choice and a child should enjoy doing it, even if they are competing. While a little stress is okay when it comes time for a competition, too much can have an affect on daily life. Parents, teachers, and coaches might put on too much pressure just because he/she has this gene and is supposedly a great powerful athlete.
As far as giving advice, I would tell parents that if they really want to spend the money and get this test done, they should just be very cautious and realize that they can not pressure on their child and that this is simply a tool. The test will not be a 100% accurate predictor as to whether a child will be great at running, swimming, soccer, wrestling, etc. Every sport can and should be played with interest and motivation, and child should never feel pressured. It's all about fun.
My primary concern is the psychological impact of this information on a child- either through pressure from his parents to excel in sports if he happens to hold the gene combinations that are commonly found in Olympic athletes or, the contrary, if it is found that he does not hold the genetic specificities and thus is not enrolled or pushed to do sports. Clearly, the child himself may not understand the particularities of the test but its results can drastically alter the way a parent interacts with his child, it can modify the expectations and thus change the choices a parent makes for his child: these being choices that may have been much different if this information were not known. Just because a child does not have the gene, does not mean he will not benefit from playing team sports, will not excel in a certain sport and definitely does not mean he can not make it to the Olympics. At the moment, it is nearly a commonality between Olympic players. Furthermore, just because a child has the gene does not make him a dead ringer for the Olympics. It may in fact set him up to feel as if he is inferior or a failure if he possesses the genes but not the athletic superiority expected of him.
ReplyDeleteSince this is available "DTC", I worry what parents will know when ordering the tests and whether they will be able to interpret the results, as they can be unclear and only mildly accurate. As we all know, just because you don't have the BRCA gene, does not mean you will not get breast cancer. I would advise that parents not waste their money on a test that has minimal research and unclear medical precision. Children should be allowed to play sports without the pressure of living up to Olympic expectations (there is enough pressure in sports from a very young age as it is) and without the impression that they will never be good enough to play. Genetic research has its place, and this is not worth it.
Katherine Duncan
ReplyDeleteAs with a lot of the articles we've read, my first reaction is to be cautious. Not much is being left to chance with all these new genetic tests. I understand genetic tests for disorders and treatments for diseases, but I think there will be a point where genetic tests go too far. What happened to just wanting a happy and healthy baby? Now people want to know if their child will be a good baseball player or golfer. I think that this knowledge would be detrimental to a child. Part of the fun of playing sports is discovering for yourself what you are good at. Personally, I tried many sports when I was growing up and finally found one I liked. My athletic ability certainly had something to do with me liking field hockey, but many other factors go into choosing a sport that you like (your coach, team or individual sport, your teammates, the season, and how much joy you get out of playing that sport).
Though in the article the president of the company says the test is not an indication of how good some one will be at a sport, I think that's how most parents would interpret this test. No nine year old needs to be told they can't play baseball because their genes don't indicate that they will be good at it. No child should be pushed into playing a sport just because their genes supposedly say they would excel. A child should only play a sport if they LIKE that sport. What ever happened to practice makes perfect? If this test becomes popular, that saying will no longer have meaning for kids. Kids might think that if they try something different they might be setting themselves up for failure. I think that many of these genetic tests could be dangerous and completely change how some parents choose to raise their children. We're getting that much closer to the society portrayed in GATTACA. I'm fairly certain that no one wants to end up like that.
With regards to ACTN3, Stephen Roth says, "We have very little information that it affects kids' performance." If I were to give advice I would suggest that parents thinking of having this genetic test done ask themselves what their motives are. I would say to use the information from the test carefully if they choose to have it done.
I am not very surprised to learn that genetics has a high impact on the muscle strength which therefore implies athletic capabilities. In high school, I ran track for four years, but despite working just as hard, for some of my peers, their great athletic performance just seemed to come so naturally. Their athletic genetics, in that case, definitely had the final say in athletic performance. This is not to downplay the achievements and hard work of great athletes, but the genetic factor definitely plays a large role in determining athletic performance.
ReplyDeleteDespite the implications of genes and athletic performance, I do not agree in testing for only one gene variant to determine athletic capabilities. I believe that there are other genes that may have a say on athletic performance, not just ACTN3. There may be epigenetic factors that may enhance or silence ACTN3. Perhaps there are other genes that enhance hand-eye coordination, reaction/reflexes, and/or flexibility. Many sports also require team-work which requires cognitive ability – the ability to process what is going on in the field as well as the ability to make sequences of decisions regarding game-play. As the article states, the DTC test for the ACTN3 gene tests mainly for strength and power, but not other qualities which are required of professional athletes.
While it may be interesting to know whether or not children are genetically gifted with athleticism, I hope parents do not take the results of this test as an end-all-be-all determining factor of child talents. Strength and power are clearly not the only factors of athleticism at all. Despite what the test results say, parents should still encourage their children to pursue what they wish. Genetics is only one factor of athletic performance, but hard work and support are other factors that can enhance athletic performance. Although I was not the best sprinter on my team, the support and companionship of my peer sprinters definitely helped me to define a great high school experience.
According to a 2004 article one of the most critical periods of motor development for children occurs between the ages of 9 and 12. During this period children are also “developmentally ready to acquire general overall sport skills that are the cornerstones of all athletic development” (Balyi 2004). While it is important to start children early when there is an expectation of excellence, the gains of acquiring this information before the age of 9 are likely negligible. While the article states that 50% of muscle strength is genetically predetermined, it fails to state how many current olympians and pro-athletes carry this genetic mutation. I competed in sports as a child and saw many parents forcing their children into a particular sport to relive their personal dreams. Extremely competitive “athlete parents” are no different from pageant moms. My initial reaction is that this screening will simply provide parents with a new opportunity to exploit their children. The implications for under educated consumers is misunderstanding the results and limitations. The outcomes of intensive training after the age of 9 would be much more effective due to their child’s cognitive capacity and developing motor skills. As such my recommendation would be to skip the test because the value of the results, assuming they are even interpreted correctly, before the age of 9 is negligible.
ReplyDeletehttp://soccermastercourse.com/pdf/athlete_dev.pdf
There's a former Football player named Todd Marinovich that is used as an example by many Sports Psychologists to demonstrate the potential problems with early specialization. Todd's father was an NFL quarter back and the article I attached talks about how Todd was only able to eat a special diet, getting stretched as a toddler and being molded into a quarterback from as young as possible. Although Todd became good at what he did he eventually quit the NFL with serious drug addictions and depression.
Deletehttp://waywardamericans.wordpress.com/2012/12/28/todd-and-marv-marinovich-the-sad-story-of-how-sports-dominated-the-life-of-a-young-man/
Angela makes a great point about early specialization, it's dangers and also the dangers of over-bearing parents. I think Todd can be a good example of these dangers.
My initial reaction to this article was just shaking my head and sighing at how sad it is for our society specifically. I can’t speak for too many other countries but I know that individuals in the US are driven by what they are exposed on over media or societal norms. We all strive to be a certain way and the competition to be the best sometimes gets out of hand. When I read this article I thought about the show “Toddlers and Tiaras”, which is the show where moms usually force their toddlers to compete in these beauty pageants and will do absolutely anything to have their children win. Kids are supposed to be free and run around and make the most of the first couple years of their lives. They are not meant to have plastic surgery or have dental work done or spend hours and hours each day practicing a routine.
ReplyDeleteIn the same way, this test will make parents want to have their child tested and if they happen to have this variant, I feel as though these parents will force their child to compete and be the best, even if the child doesn’t want to. Or what about if the parents are athletes but the child doesn’t have the variant? Then the parents may want to try to alter their child’s genetic profile which causes another set of ethical issues.
If I had to leave a comment, I would encourage parents to let their children pick their own passions. Forcing their children to do something because it is supposedly in their genes instead of allowing them to discover on their own what they’re good at will can lead to negative effects in the long run. I would also reiterate that there are over 20,000 genes that are associated with fitness performance and that the scientists themselves don’t even feel confident determining how ACTN3 contributes to performance. Lastly, this test is meant to determine a child’s athletic abilities before age 9, before children actually grow and mature so there are definitely many more factors that go into this than just having a specific gene.
Liz brings up a very interesting point here. In U.S. society today people are obsessed with what is better, faster and stronger. The fact that there is a genetic test that can predict whether or not a child will be good at a particular sport contributes to this. How necessary is this information? For other genetic test we are looking for mutations or repeats that will negatively affect health outcomes so that we can potentially decrease the expression of that gene. Here we are looking for a gene so we can train children to be good athletes base on their genetic makeup. This is not fair to the child and is leaving out the concept of genetic variability.
DeleteCompetition is what drives evolution and genetic variability is essential to human survival. I'm glad the article brings up the point that this test brings us to an ethical dark area because we are becoming too selective. Who are we to select what is better or not, mother nature has its way of doing that for us. I feel that genetic testing should be left to improve health outcomes and not give someone an unfair advantage over someone else. Children should be able to play whatever sport they want and get better with practice!
My initial reaction to this article was very skeptical. I believe a lot of things make someone a good athlete, with genetics only being part of the picture. Testing children under the age of nine really stood out to me. At that age, in my opinion, sports are about developing motor skills, a healthy lifestyle, and values such as teamwork, and less about the prospects of future professional success in athletics. Having the results of a test like this could lead to parents pushing more or less for their children to like sports. Even if someone doesn’t have the genes to make them a great sprinter, they shouldn’t be discouraged from participating on their high school track team. And on the flip side, just because someone does have a genetic predisposition for success in a certain sport, doesn’t mean they should have to pursue it if they do not want to. I think many parents would rely on this test much more than they should, letting it dictate how they chose to handle sports when raising their child. As the article states, this test should only be part of the picture, though if a child were to have this gene, I think it is very likely that the parents would lose sight of that fact. My comments to those considering the tests would be cautionary, to remind parents that there is still more to be discovered about these genes and that this test is only part of the picture. When it comes down to it, it is the decision of the parents, but I think a good reminder to keep things in perspective would be helpful.
ReplyDeleteWhen I first started reading the article about how Atlas Sports Genetics if offering this test for variants of ACTN3 gene for only $149, I thought the company, not the article, seemed manipulative because it was trying to promote people to get this test. In the article, the company’s president did say that “parents shouldn't view the test as the final word on whether their child will excel at a particular sport.” But he only said this to ScientificAmerican.com and the article didn't specifically say he said this to the ads or the information for this genetic test. And it’s great that the article does say the company developed this test to rely on association and not causation; that it is seen that this gene shows us in Olympic athletes and therefore there is some association that those who have this gene may become very athletic. But I don’t know how exactly they are advertising this DTC genetic test, and it makes me skeptical because people might not understand the difference between an association and causation and they might take this genetic test very seriously; to the point that parents might think this is the ultimate tool that will determine whether their child is athletic or not. And this may cause parents to change their views on whether or not to let their child do sports because if they knew they didn’t have the gene they might think what is the point of letting them do a sport if they won’t do well in it or if they see their child has the gene they might really push for their child to continue to do the sport since they expect their child to excel in it, even if the child actually doesn’t want to do it anymore. It might also lead the child to believe that one day he or she may become an Olympian as well just because they have this gene. Parents just might get tricked into taking this genetic test for their children and it could lead to many unhappy consequences for the family’s future if these parents aren’t genetically savvy and don’t really understand how this test works, and especially what these results may mean.
ReplyDeleteThe article was great in explaining this gene and the test for it. And the interview with Stephen Roth was great especially in the first question he answered about “to what extent do genes determine athletic ability.” My advice to those who are reading and thinking about trying the test for their children is read this article that I just read (because it was great in explaining the test and what the gene and results may mean), to look up as much information as they can about this test before considering it, such as other people’s views on this and, and most importantly, I would advise parents who are considering it to really understand what genes mean and exactly what these results mean, especially to understand that this isn't the ultimate test of whether your child is athletic or not. Overall, I would actually not recommend parent’s giving their child this test because it would only give disappointment, such that thinking your child may never be as athletic as you hope they would be, or unguaranteed hope, such that your child will exceed in sports. I personally feel that yes some people are more athletic than others, but saying to them that just because you don’t have this specific gene, you will not be that great at a sport, will only discourage children from doing the sport, or even from doing sports at all, which would then decrease exercise in general for children. And exercise and sports is such an important thing in life. Sports and exercise keeps everyone healthy in life. Don’t let a genetic test discourage people from doing an activity that may promote healthy well-being.
My initial reaction to this article was that it sounded too good to be true. Who would have ever thought there would ever be a genetic test that could help determine what sports your child is likely to excel at BEFORE their fine and motor skills are even fully developed. After learning about direct to consumer genetic testing, I couldn’t help but notice a little red flag that went up in my head as I continued to read the article. This screening has the potential to influence parents and their children to make lifestyle changes based purely on ONE test result. Because Atlas Sports Genetics provides the only DTC test for the ACTN3 gene, how can someone verify the tests accuracy? Consumers have no other test to compare it to. DTC screening leaves the consumer responsible for deciding whether or not the test is accurate and valid. There are no quality standards for these tests, so who is left to decide whether the test is of the best quality? YOU! Furthermore, DTC tests do not account for the counseling needed to interpret the results and discuss how the results could influence said child’s life. For example, say Billy loves to run. After receiving the results from the screening for the ACTN3 gene, it shows that Billy would be better at playing basketball. How do the parents and Billy decide what is best for him? Without consulting someone with the proper knowledge to interpret his results, Billy could end up playing basketball and be good at it, but hating every minute of it because he loves to run. There are so many misinterpretations that could be made from receiving the results because the consumer is not properly informed about how to take the results. Also, something that probably isn’t well advertised on the DTC ACTN3 website is what happens to the results of your tests after they are sent in. Are they saved on a computer? Are they thrown out once they are sent? What happens if Atlas Sports Genetics goes out of business? Where does all that information go? Currently, there is nothing in place to ensure that your results are protected. If a website tells you otherwise, it is lying! To summarize, consumers interested in DTC testing should not heavily rely on the results. Consumers should consult a physician for help interpreting the results to prevent life changing mistakes from happening. Lastly, consumers should be weary of the accuracy and validity of the test. If it seems to good to be true, chances are it probably is.
ReplyDeleteMy initial reaction is that this form of testing is attempting to profit off of bad science. The article
ReplyDeletestates how scientists know very little of how ACTN3 affects children. Given that is test is aimed at children under 9, I feel as though this testing is more focused on generating profit and yielding highly inconclusive results. I appreciate that Kevin Reilly states that the testing should not be viewed as the determining factor in a child’s athletic success, but is this a philosophy he displays in his advertising and communicates with his clients? Parents considering this testing at face value, may very well be inclined to think that this test is a determining factor. With all direct-to-consumer advertising , especially in the medical field, people need to high scrutinize the product or service being offered and how scientifically sound it is. In this situation, I find this testing is severely lacking in data to back up the validity of its results. For parents considering this testing, I would educate them on how the results of this test have no real scientific validation. I feel that this testing could also have negative effects on a child’s self-esteem. If the child tests negative for ACTN3, they may lose motivation to train and strive for their dreams of athletic success in a particular sport or overall. I think it would be advantageous to avoid this kind of testing and encourage your child to pursue their own athletic interests. In the future, I feel when this sect of testing is more finely tuned, it could be beneficial in modifying work out plans (particularly those with weight issues) by highlighting which kinds of exercise a person is more structured for. This testing as it is currently, however, is just an a means by which to waste $149 dollars and prey on the less genetically informed.
I have to agree with Jessica Beck's comment which points out the lack of proven correlations between ACTN3 and athletic performance. Besides the obvious lack of verifiable connection between the protein and athleticism I shudder to imagine the potential burden this places on the future of any child who is analyzed. The film Gattaca comes to mind when I first read this article. In summary the film portrays a fictional future society where genes are able to be altered to maximize "talent" according to what the parent selects. The protagonist's parents elect not to alter the infant's genes and have a natural birth. The protagonist is born with a heart deformity and is unable to travel to space, a life long dream, due to this physical hurdle. The other candidates are genetically perfect both physically and mentally. At the end of the film the main character through sheer will and years of evading government detection narrowly passes the physical admission testing and achieves his goal and becomes an astronaut.
ReplyDeleteThis film brings up a lot of concerns I thing may arise if parents begin to purchase these tests and really credit them as fact. Although the test makers attempt to point out the data may not be an indicator, parents may change their expectations with this information. In an article from the Washington Post (2012) it brings up issues with society's obsession with professional athletes and the pressures that our children are burdened with. If from birth, a child shows potential to be an athlete they may automatically be raised to pursue that career path. This issue not only affects the athletes but also opens similar concerns as genetic testing begins to explore other traits that may be traced back to our DNA. Other similar implications may arise in areas like intellect and other physical traits. As genetic testing becomes more commonplace, and it certainly will in the coming years, it also brings up issues of social expectations and pressures.
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-parenting/post/the-olympics-child-athletes-and-the-line-between-support-and-pressure/2012/07/25/gJQAXFs78W_blog.html)
My initial reaction to this article was that this company is absurd and trying to scam people out of their money. I believe that even if a child does not have this gene, they can still become an elite athlete if they have the right mind set. It is possible to mold a child to excel in a sport with lots of practice and a positive attitude. This gene may help athletic performance but it is not the end all be all to athletics. I think that a lot of parents who do not know much about science (or even sports) but want to see their children succeed will believe that there is causation rather than association (as mentioned by previous students). I think parents should do a lot of research on the gene / company before deciding to spend the money on the test. Parents must keep in mind the results are not definitive. I would tell parents that if they do have their child tested, if it comes back positive not to push their child into sports. A child should have fun while playing sports and parents may think that this gene is going to get their kid to the Olympics and push them too hard. It is important that a child engages in activities that they enjoy and not ones that parents force upon them. Additionally, a child should want to work at the sport on their own and have the determination to make it as an elite athlete. Furthermore, if the test comes back negative I would still encourage the child to continue to play sports. Even without the gene I believe a child can succeed in athletics.
ReplyDeleteMy initial reaction to this article was mild amusement that some people could try and base an assumption for someone's athletic potential off of such a small possible indicator. Yes, the article mentioned taking other factors in to account but the fact that this company is offering a test for ONE specific gene is ridiculous. Not only does it present the idea to the uninformed public that a single gene could determine athletic success or failure in a child, it potentially casts a shadow over one of the key developmental periods in a child's life.
ReplyDeleteIf a parent were to interpret these tests too seriously, they could bar their child from engaging in multiple sports either due to favor of the sport their child is supposedly going to excel in, or excluding the child from sports altogether because the test did not show a favorable result. The period in a young child's life where they involve themselves in a multitude of activities and try many different sports is highly influential later on. Not only does it allow the child to choose a sport of their own liking, it helps to develop a well-balanced individual. Several studies have shown that multi-sport athletes tend to excel better when they specialize later on, as opposed to young athletes who specialize in just one sport from a very young age.
I think this test could be beneficial in other areas, but the possibility for misinterpretation and misuse at that level of young children is too great. I would suggest to parents wanting to use this test to be wary of the test results. Just because a given result does not predispose their child to a certain activity, that is in no way an indicator that the child should be barred from engaging in that event. If the test comes back favorable, but the child does not want to engage in sports but instead in something else, do not push them. Children should be given the opportunity to choose from a WIDE range of activities, both athletic and non-athletic. A parents job is to open doors for their children, not to shove them in one direction or another.Sports history is littered with individuals who were NOT supposed to be good at their sport, due to body type, style, prior sport history etc... The world is not black and white and this test threatens to try and portray it as such.
A child has every right to pursue his or her own interest and creating a predisposition argument to sports in a genetic contexts will only drive over zealous parents who want a wealthy child. I feel foolish even arguing this in a day and age where we should realize that prejudice of any basis should not be tolerated. Perfect and optimized human beings are too vastly different things because one doesn't exist and one is a statistical oddity of combined genetics and environment. This will only influence society to learn about the useless side of genetics that put people further apart rather than showing them the capabilities we can all have. This just shouldn't happen. And besides, they've already done studies on the monoamine oxidase A "warrior gene" to prove that yes, even though you can have it you don't necessarily show anti social behavior, as shown by a Moroccan community they tested who has never had a murder in living history, and yet they contained this warrior gene. And conversely, you can turn anyone into a killing machine when trained to do so in the military, even if they don't have this gene. This is just one of many example that prove the importance of weighing genetics with epigenetics
ReplyDeleteThere is a lot in this article that I do not agree with. I do realize that they acknowledge that this gene is not the whole picture, just one part of it, but even still, I do not agree with genetically testing children under 9 for athletic ability. As an athlete, I believe that they are missing the whole point of sports in general. In order to play sports at a high level you have to have passion and dedication to working hard. You could have a child with the best ability out there, but if they are not driven to work hard, they will not be successful.
ReplyDeleteThis test is simply for greedy soccer moms who want their kid to be the best. The article states that this genetic test could be used to see which specific sport a child should go into, however, this process is an important aspect for children. I place very high importance on trying new sports and being able to realize what you are good at, what you aren't, and what you enjoy doing. The idea that parents could streamline this process to save wasted time is not a good thing. Kids need a chance to experience failure in sports because it will make them a better athlete. Also, it is much better to play multiple sports as a child, and even into high school. If children begin to specialize at too early of an age, it could lead to them burning out sooner and not wanting to continue that sport after high school.
This DTC company is clearly trying to get money from unsuspecting parents. My advice to those who are trying to get athletic genetic testing for their child would honestly be not to do it. However, if it is something the parents are set on, I would send them to a genetic counselor or someone who could help them interpret any results that they do receive. I definitely do not agree with this testing, but if it needs to be done, it should at least be administered and delivered by professionals in the field and not DTC companies.
I agree with Kim that companies offering genetic testing without the follow up advice from a genetic counselor on how to interpret the results is not beneficial. This test doesn't seem necessary for several obvious reasons which I have discussed in my earlier post, but I think DTC companies should be regulated by a strict set of government rules. The fact that any person can promote a genetic testing to the public and attempt to make money off of it is somewhat like the snake oil salesman in the mid 19th century. I believe this quackery should be ruled out by the government in order to protect uneducated citizens.
DeleteAlexandra Kramer
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure I agree with this article. Although I usually believe it is great to at least be discovering new knowledge about genes and what makes up our bodies, I feel as though this is a bit unnecessary. I don't know if I agree that this gene has that much to do with a person's athletic ability. Many people even comment on how mental sports and physical activity can be. If anything, this would just discourage those who have so much athletic potential into thinking less of themselves if they don't have this specific gene.
Like many of the other articles, it is mentioned how this gene is not a definite yes or no for talent and ability, just an indication. For this specific test, however, I don't really find it necessary to do in the first place. I guess I wouldn't recommend it to parents because I don't think that this is what they should be focusing on when putting their child into sports. I believe that when kids get into sports, it is not just to succeed and grow up to be a professional, but to teach them teamwork, determination, and more, as well as to get them moving, whether they are good or bad. A gene should not deter away from these lessons, especially if it is not giving any definite information. People should not be focusing on what their bodies "can" or "cannot" do, but what they can push themselves to do.
I think it is important that Atlas Athletics acknowledged that this is simply "a tool," not "the tool." My initial reaction was a bit put off, but honestly I am not surprised. Athletics are an enormous industry that encompasses various entities; It was only a matter of time for genetics to become a hot topic. It all seems a little obsessive. Children who are playing sports at the age of nine should pick a sport that interests them, not one that they are genetically going to excel at. Failure is a part of life that needs to be acknowledged and children need to learn how to deal with that. We should probably just let our genes/lives run their natural course without so much interference. Some problems with the fact that this is a DTC test are of course the integrity of the results along with their interpretation. Do you have to pay to have them interpreted? A lot of questions can be raised here. It seems like a waste of money since people constantly defy odds and the predictions of geneticists/doctors. I could see it fostering a defeated attitude in children who wish to play a certain sport but arent genetically equipped to be the best at it. I would tell parents to forget it and give their child the freedom to decide for themselves what theyd like to do. In summary, dont waste your money!
ReplyDeleteMy initial reaction to this article is that parents who want to live bi curiously through their children will run out to get this test for their children. And if their children turn out positive for any variant of the ACTN3 gene, they will force them to countless hours of practice of a sport that perhaps their children might not like. I do not agree with testing children who are under 9 years of age. I feel that the age range of below 9 years is too soon to be able to tell above-normal ability of a child in any given sport. I believe that if this test is performed and a child is positive for any variant of the ACTN3 gene, many parents will make their child continue practicing a sport that they currently practice for years on end. And I believe that it is possible that a child could test positive, practice a sport for decades, and not be a star of that sport. They could just be average like the rest of the people on the team. I think that this test would do more harm than good. This test is any overzealous parents' dream. Their child testing positive for the gene would validate their preference to have a child who practices sports.
ReplyDeleteAnother adverse effect from this test would be that positive results would make parents force their children to practice a very specific type of sport. For example, if a child tests positive for two R variants of the gene, a parent would force their child to practice football, since having two R variants makes people more apt to play endurance sports. However, this could not match up with the child's taste for sports. Perhaps they would want to or even excel at soccer. Or even not want to practice or have the talents for sports at all. I just see this test adding overall stress to the life or a child and/or a family overall.
Perhaps, a positive side-effect of this test would be a child discovering their talent for a sport they otherwise wouldn't have tried to play had they not had this test. And to me, being good a sport increases you likelihood of playing it and finding it enjoyable. Who knows, the test could result in more professional athletes being discovered down the line. But time will tell.
If I could offer some advice to those parents considering getting this test done to their child, I would remind them that the point isn't to get their child to the professional or Olympic level. Rather, sports are a great tool to teach their child teamwork, hard work, and discipline. Take this test with a grain of salt. Do not take it too seriously. Remember to put your love for a child above all.
Jamie Shaw
ReplyDeleteInitially, I am appalled by this test. I feel that it is taking advantage of a specific type of audience, particularly parents who want to have their child succeed at a sport and allowing them to continue to attempt to control their child. This was mentioned in another post but it was my first reaction as well to quickly think of Toddlers and Tiaras. I also immediately thought of a family whose boys I went to high school with. The family was very athletically inclined, and they were raising the boys to be the same. One child turned up to become a huge football star, and was recruited for college on scholarship. The other boy had the same fate but with basketball instead. The boys were very good at what they did, but were both incredibly miserable and the basketball player planned to stop playing basketball while in college. Most outsiders who looked at them and saw their fortune said how proud their parents must be, or wow they're great, but anyone who personally knew they felt so bad for them, and we all knew how sad they were.
I feel like this test is a gateway for parents to act exactly this way toward their children. I see parents having either the reason to excel their children through sports or be disappointed in them and try to push them further, and neither is good. Childhood is the few years of happiness and true care-free ness that you have, and I find it unfortunate that companies are preying on this type of parent to take this away from children.
Now if I have to make a positive comment about this it would be this: I think something good that would come of this is that perhaps one day we can screen to see how athletically inclined a child is, and develop a training plan to help them reach their best in whatever sport they choose to pursue. I feel that that would be a positive impact that genetic testing could have on athleticism, but will not hinder or harm how the parent treats the child.
My initial reaction to this article was that I was impressed. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies are making good use of the genetic testing technology to lure in consumers with information they want to hear. From a psychology and business perspective, this test is genius. Parents want nothing more for their children than to succeed, and especially in the United States where athletic competition may often be prided more than athletic achievement.. And hey, $149 is not too bad, it's a "genetic test" - very high tech.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, from the perspective of a health professional, this test is distasteful and deceiving. Though the ACTN3 gene variants may predict the development of specific muscle types conducive to certain sports, the knowledge behind the test is sparse - this is the first test for any fitness gene in the US, and there is no sensitivity or specificity listed. Who knows how accurate this test is? Also, genetics play up to a 50% role in the outcome of what is actually (phenotypically) expressed in an individual.
Not only do I have a problem with this test for its lack of scientific support and validity, but my biggest concern is for those parents who would want to use this test to set standards for their children to live up to, not to mention the fact that this test may allow the child to have an "unfair" advantage over other children in a particular sport because the parents "knew" ahead of time that the child would excel in, say, soccer. Back to the first point though, this DTC genetic test looks to me like something that an overbearing parent would be drawn to like a fly on flypaper. My message to parents: this test looks like a way of control; a means to control and shape the future of the child. What if this isn't what he or she wants? If you're testing a child before the age of 9, first of all you are most likely making this choice for him/her, and he or she might not have any idea what they want to do just yet, athletically or otherwise.
Bottom line, childhood should be about fun through exploring and learning. If I were a parent at this time with a young child, I would and I plan to allow my child to try things out for herself, experiment and just have fun. If it turns out she loves soccer and is a great soccer player, great. If she loves soccer and is the worst player on the team, she still loves it, and I will support whatever she wants to do. We must learn to release control over others and allow our children to live and to learn.
My initial reaction to the article was that if gene therapy reaches sports, then there will be no limits as to what we can and cannot alter. People will keep pushing for more and more and the definition of “perfection” will also changed. If we make someone excel at everything (intelligence, sports, sociability, etc.) then what is left for them to learn or gain throughout life? At this point in time, most six and eight year olds are living carefree lives, just trying to have fun in the playground. But if testing becomes routine, especially for athletic families, the pressure for these kids to succeed will be great. Problems may also arise if the gene exists in all but one or two of the children. If the two parents produce children that receive two copies of the R variant, would it not be expected that all of their children will excel in both power and endurance sports? The problem also lies in the purpose of the test, because currently scientists still don’t know if having the gene will cause you to perform at an elite level. This may also result in problems with the child’s development. If the child grows up being told that he or she is going to be amazing at a particular sport and then fails to prove himself/herself in comparison to other talented athletes, this will stir up feelings of great failure and disappointment.
ReplyDeleteBecause this is available direct to consumer, parents who don’t know a lot about genetic tests may expect this test to reveal whether or not their child will perform well or badly in sports. However, the article specifically states that if they are expecting this, they will be disappointed because this test is a tool to see what sport may be best for their child. However this statement can be misleading when looking at the web site. According to the website, “Kids who have two copies of the X variant from both parents don’t make alpha-actinin-3, and might excel at endurance sports such as cross-country skiing, distance running or swimming” (Lite, J., 2008). Parents can take this as fact and ignore the “might excel,” reading it as though they will have a guarantee. They may put their child in programs specialized for children who have two copies of the R variant and who are expected to excel with high athletic abilities.
If I were to leave a comment I would warn parents to be weary. I would tell them that if they decide to pursue the test, the results should be looked at as an idea of something that has potential to happen but is not definite. There is no guarantee of ability to truly show up until later on in life. Science is getting closer to being able to completely alter our genes, but for now this isn’t the answer, but a tool that can be used as a reference point. The results shouldn’t automatically mean that pressure should now be put on the child in order to guarantee excelled performance later on in life, or that they should be placed in special programs. Parents should take heed to what they find, especially until after the purpose of this tests and the results it holds, are more researched.
Lite, J. (December 2008). Can genes predict athletic performance? Scientific American. Retrieved from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm? id=genes-sports-talent
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3255226/
This article claims they also have a commercially available test, so is Reilly telling the truth that his is the only one available to the public?
Initially I didn’t believe that a single genetic test could determine if a child would be better at sports than others. I also thought (and still think) that 9 years old is too young to get tested for a gene that is still being discovered. Just because a child does not have this variation at the age of 9 doesn’t mean that he/she will not eventually develop into a strong athlete in the adolescent years. The article states that some of the functions of the variation of the gene haven’t been determined yet. I did like that the article states that this test is a tool and not the only tool that will determine a child’s athleticism. I think that parents who aren’t aware of the negative aspects of direct to consumer testing will be more likely to get their children tested for the gene. Children who do test positive for the gene will probably be signed up to play specific sports and be pushed to excel in activities that they may not want to participate in. Other parents whose children do not have this gene might refuse to pay for sports or activities just because their child tested negative. Before having a child tested, parents should seek the help of a genetic counselor who can help interpret the validity of both the test and the results.
ReplyDeleteI would definitely make sure that parents know that there are many factors that make up a good athlete aside from genetics. I personally would not test my own children because I wouldn’t care if they were particularly good at a sport that they love to play. Children don’t need to be put through an unnecessary test that could negatively affect his/her self-esteem if the test comes back negative. I would also inform parents that DTC tests are not always reliable and would encourage those still wanting to order the test to also have the child’s pediatrician examine the test criteria and results. Overall, I don’t think that we should be relying on DTC tests to determine whether or not our children are athletic.
My initial reaction is how this would ruin a child’s childhood and as well as a parent’s experience of raising their child. Their world would just rely on a test and they would get too wrapped up on the idea that once their child is tested and is found with the ACTN3 gene that now their child would be next Olympian. As my other classmates have pointed out the quote “This is a tool, not the tool… If it’s a tool along with other components, you can use it to select what may be the best sport for you or for a child” is one that summarizes the article well. Take it as you will but you should not count on this test as the final say. At the end of it where is the scientific research other than that Olympic sprinters have the ACTN3 variants? It takes away the joy of the unknown and of success. I’m not trying to promote that this test will tell you if your child will be an Olympian but from what this article seems to want to prove is that it will provide information at what sports your child will be best at. A question I wanted to ask the writers at the end of it was if there evidence that some of the greatest Olympians don’t have this gene at all? Overall, this article would need more scientific evidence and research to back up what they prove to be a genetic test that would reveal a child's athletic predispositions.
ReplyDeleteSince this is available through Direct to Consumer there are certain implications for parents. These types of test seem to make assumptions of certain family history and characteristics of a person. Also, no medical background or evidence of these methods may be necessary making it not necessary for a doctor to prescribe or make decisions about the interpretations of the test. That would definitely make me a little skeptical about the results and what they truly mean. As discussed in class these types of test make it appealing to consumers, cheaper, quicker, and easier to get results however it doesn’t also make it accurate or valid. So from a business stance this is a great idea but after taking this class it makes me analyze the true reason for creating such a test.
Here’s some word of advice for those of you who are thinking about trying the test for your children. Do you want to raise your child counting on a test that says they’ll be good at a certain sport and you spent all the time and money on training him/her and she end up resenting you for it? What if their true passion was in something else? I don’t want to make assumptions myself just like this article but it also all does depend on your intentions with the test. If you plan to just take it for fun and just a reference to see if it works but just still let your child explore their interests then I would say why not it’s simple and cheap. But if you have the intentions of using this test to mold your child into the next sport star then I would say don’t do it. Your life would just revolve around this one test and you may get disappointed and even mad if your child doesn’t even end up liking or being good at sports at all! Take it how you want it but for me personally I wouldn’t want my child to be tested for this gene. I’d want my child to discover their own personal talents and interests and I would want to provide them with those opportunities instead of stopping them because of what a test told me. Whatever happened to just letting natural talent happen? New tests such as these make it seem so forceful and overbearing of parents who want that perfect and ideal child. It gets rid of letting a child just live a normal, happy, and fun life. It also gets rid of the spontaneity of a child’s life and what will happen, why not let things happen as they may and go from there? There needs to be structure in a child’s life but this just takes it to another level.
Unless a family is trying to breed their own family baseball or football team I really do not see how this test is helpful or even promotes progress. I know that my parents could not have cared less if I was good at sports (which I wasn't). I personally feel that this test allows the parents to decide what their child wants to do. Even if the test come up positive, it does not mean their child will enjoy playing the sport. Many people have said that team sports help children learn good values such as teamwork, hard work,and leadership, which I completely agree with especially from personal experience. To gain these values, I think that it does not matter whether you were "born to play" or not. It is what the sport gives back to you that pushes you forward and to gain those values. If a parent gets a negative test back, it is possible that the child would not have been pushed or encouraged to play sports and therefore deprived of an opportunity to learn and gain certain values of the sport. If I could leave parents with a comment, I would ask why? Why do you need to know whether your child is going to be the next Tiger Woods, David Beckham or Serena Williams? Why can't you just expose your child to various sports and let them appreciate them on their own terms? And so what if they are not "athletic". There are plenty of other hobbies. Even the article said the DTC are "a tool" not "the tool."
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you Alisa. You made a great point about what the sport "gives back to you"...the values that you gain...its all about the process and not necessarily the end result. Also, I loved the other idea you brought up about a lot of people never thinking about the effects of a "negative test" result. Some may think of the test as harmless, but parents may unknowingly change the way they raise their child (how they treat them, the activities they sign them up for, etc) because of a not so ideal test result. This is why having a child take such a test is really not in the best interest of the child nor the parents.
DeleteJonathan Greenbaum
ReplyDeleteIt is undeniable that some people are more naturally gifted in athletics than others. While certain people may be more suited to play sports, that doesn’t mean that those who aren’t should not participate. There are many important lessons to be learned from athletics including teamwork, competition, and motivation.
It completely makes sense that genetic factors determine attributes such as muscle strength and athletic ability. At the same time, I believe it is useless to test the ACTN3 gene. While this test may indicate that you won’t be a professional athlete, it does not say that you cannot play sports. There are many values to be taken away from the athletic arena and it is important for children to be exposed to competition. Becoming a professional athlete is not the only reason to play sports, and the overwhelming majority of people who do participate never even make it past the high school level.
Since this test is DTC I worry that parents will take these results so seriously that they alter the types of activities their kids are involved in. My suggestion is to allow kids to participate in whatever they enjoy doing because this is how they will have the most fun. Nobody should be told they can’t do something because I believe that with hard work many obstacles can be overcome.
After reading this article, my initial thought was that parents will undoubtedly take advantage of this genetic test. The test is affordable and it could be used to the advantage of many. If a child is found with a variant of the ACTN3 gene, I definitely think that parents will start pushing their child to play sports at a young age. I think this is particularly true today where top athletes in high school are able to get full scholarships to great colleges even if they do not necessarily have the grades of get in. Playing sports and being exceptionally good gives students an advantage and I think that if parents know their child has a gene that could help their child excel in athletic performance, they will take advantage of it at an early age. Despite this test being "a tool" rather than "the tool" to determining athleticism, I still think parents will try to control their child's life.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, the use of this test is unnecessary. I do not believe that parents need to know if their child might have a gene for athletic performance. Instead, I think that children who want to play sports and are dedicated athletes, will excel in their sport regardless of whether or not a gene indicates their ability. Determining if a child has this gene will not help prevent or alleviate a disease that a child might have like other genetic tests have the ability to do so I ultimately feel as though this test if useless. It only has the ability to put some children at more of an advantage than others in athletic performance, but because this test is not the whole answer, I believe it is unnecessary.
My initial reaction to this article is that looking at the genotype for the production of certain proteins makes sense, to an extent. We have certain muscle types that can help us excel in certain sports better than others. It comes down to differentiating between fast glycolytic muscles types and slow oxidative. It can help in determining how quickly our muscles would fatigue and how fast metabolism can take place. However, we tend to forget that these phenotypes are only one aspect of excelling in a sport. Hard work and practice plays an extremely huge role and can even lead to epigentic changes. Therefore, I believe this is a decent starting point to give people an idea of the athletic potential of a child. However, I’m not sure I like the idea of looking for these variants. Once a child can find out that he or she has the copies, they might feel pressured by their parents to go into a certain sport, even if they have no motivation to do so. Their parent may take the results as meaning that it is guaranteed that having the variant will mean excelling. It can create unnecessary competition and put stress on the child for something they cannot control and for something that is not even assured to occur.
ReplyDeleteThis being a DTC also comes with possible implications. One can be that the results might not be true. The parents have to look into the labs and providers associated with the testing to see how reliable and accurate the results are. The test does cost money so it is important for them to make sure it is not a scam. There is also the issue of understanding the results as mentioned before. Having both R copies indicates that the protein is made and the child can have the potential to perform well in high power sports. This does not mean that a child who has the variant does not have to work as hard because it’s in their genes. It also does not mean that a child who does not have the variant can in no way have a good performance in high power sports. Parents may also wonder about the privacy of the results, and questioning who looks at the information.
I would advise people looking into the test to remember that one’s genotype does not determine your performance. It plays a big role, but it is not the sole indicator. It is important to let children figure out what they want to do and to go into certain sports because they enjoy it, and not to stress them out unnecessarily. It is also important for parents to remember that the results of the test should not give them excessive control over the decisions their child should make regarding which sport to play. The results should be taken as a vague suggestion.
My initial reaction to this article is that it seems that is it a slippery slope. It is still not fully understood exactly what predicts if a person will be successful at sports. The article mentions that right now the more reliable gene is ACTN3. However, there are many other factors that contribute to a person’s athletic abilities. Additionally, the article mentions that ethically there can be issues. The article discussed the possibility of altering a person’s genetic profile in order to make a person better at sports. Another thought I had was that it doesn’t seem all that beneficial of a test. It is good to know what genes can predict certain traits, however, it seems that this test can be used in ways that don’t seem necessary. Even if a person finds out their young child has this gene is it really beneficial in a way aside from giving them reason to encourage them to do or not do a certain sport?
ReplyDeleteA concern I have about this test being used on young children is that parents may use it to pressure their kids into sports if they find out they have the gene, or conversely they may not support their kids going into sports if they do not have the gene. Hopefully, most people wouldn’t do this, but it is always something that should be considered.
Since this is available as a DTC a possible implication is that people will not be able to interpret its results accurately. As we discussed in class about DTC tests, they typically do not come with a genetic counselor’s interpretation. This is concerning because you want people to be fully informed about the results, especially if people are testing their kids.
If I were to leave a comment under the article to those who are reading and thinking about trying the test for their children I would advise them to also go to a genetic counselor with the results or to have the test done by a doctor and then go to a genetic counselor for results. I would also encourage people not to use these tests results as a way to 100% determine if they are or will be successful at sports, since as was mentioned, ability in sports is determined by various factors and there is still a lot of research to be done and a lot that is not fully known about these genes.
It is true that some of us appear to be born more naturally “gifted” at athletics than others. That being said, I think this article is absurd. It is crazy that a parent could possibly measure their child’s athletic potential based off of one test. The article itself states that this test is one small indicator of possibly increased athletic performance and is by no means a guarantee. The professor of exercise physiology even states in this article that this test is moving into a very questionable ethical area. I think that testing a child for this gene is wrong. Predicting the future of a child under the age of nine based on this test is insane. Parents should not be given this right, and I am concerned that this test is offered directly to consumers. Parents who are not educated in the field of basic science or genomics have the potential to be fooled by marketing ploys and convinced that this is a good test to give their children. This is not only a significant waste of time and money (due to the lack of proven accuracy) but also has the potential to negatively affect their relationship and view of their children. If I were giving advice to parents, I would tell them to stay away from this test and other tests like it, especially in young children. In my opinion, this test is 100% unethical. Parents should be focusing on the health and wellness of their children, not giving them genetic tests to determine how much they will excel at their extracurricular activities.
ReplyDeleteI think this is a way to take money away from parents who worried about their child’s performance. 149$ seems pretty expensive for a test that is suppose to predict athletic performance. It shouldn’t matter what your child might excel at the most before the age of nine. Kids are under too much pressure as it is to compete in school to get good grades and excel on the sports field as well. All that should matter is that your child is enjoying sports and trying all different kinds to find his/her own favorite. I think that parents could end up taking this test to literal and then limit their child to only playing football or soccer depending on the test results they received. This could put extra pressure on a child if they are expected to stand out among other kids because their genetic test said so. Parents need to be very cautious when testing for ACTN3 variation in their child’s DNA. Even though the article stated that this test should not be used as an ultimate indicator of your child’s athleticism, I think that the test could end up being misunderstood. What if Tiger Woods who modernized the game of golf never played due to a test he received when he was young, or Michael Jordan who is a hero in the basketball world played tennis instead. I don’t see this test as being beneficial to the outcome of children’s athletic ability.
ReplyDeleteThe article did go on to say that a lot of athletic talent seems to be genetically linked. I agree with this statement because I see many adults who are playing professional sports who’s father or mother were world-class athletes as well. Eli Manning and Payton Manning are both quarterbacks in the NFL and their father was a NFL quarterback as well, or Kobe Bryant who’s father played in the NBA. Personally I would never have my child tested for ACTN3 but I could see many parents buying into this idea.
My initial reaction to this article is why do some people deem it necessary to put a scientific reason behind why some people are better at sports than others. It is just a fact of life that not everyone can excel at certain things. It just seems that this time, money, and research could be spent elsewhere and on more important things. Some parents may have their children tested and when they receive the results make their children participate in a certain sport or not participate in a certain sport based on their supposed genetic predisposition. However, excelling in sports is not something that can be solely determined by genetics. A person's coordination, dedication and a long list of other factors come into play when a person is participating in athletics. Olympic athletes have to train for years and years to have their athletic ability. Its not as if they were simply born that way. For the parents that are thinking of having their children tested they need to ultimately consider what the significance of this test means. It is determining a muscle type that may be related to athletic ability. And yet having or not having this muscle type does not limit a person's ability in sports. It is baffling to me that a parent would make decisions about which sports their child would play based on genetic testing.
ReplyDeleteMy biggest concern after reading this article would be for those children that test positive for this gene. Parents need to realize, as stated by the company's President Kevin Reilly, that this genetic test is not the sole performance indicator. However, I am afraid that parents may have high expectations for their child if they test positive, adding unnecessary pressure. There are many other factors, both biological and psychological, that can affect one's athletic ability. As I learned in my Anatomy class, muscle fiber type, whether fast twitch or slow twitch, can influence someone's athletic talent. For example, if an individual has more slow twitch fibers than fast twitch fibers, they may be better at endurance running than others. In addition, environment plays a role in gene expression. This was specifically seen in class with the BRCA gene. Possessing this gene elevates one's chances of developing cancer, but it is not a hundred percent guarantee. This would be the same with this ACTN3 gene; possessing this athletic gene may not mean one will become an Olympic athlete. Stressing this to parents is crucial to avoid over expectations if their child tests positive. Even for those children who test negative, their athletic future is not over. As stated in the article, not all Olympic athletes possess this gene. Parents and children need to realize that this gene does not determine one's fate and even those without the gene can become great athletes one day. Genes are not the be all and end all, and especially is not the only thing that makes a great athlete. Determination, perseverance, and training all combined with one's genetic makeup affect athletic performance.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, I do believe that genetics play some sort of role in athletic ability, since many successful athletes have siblings that are equally as successful (Gronkowski brothers in football, Williams sisters in tennis, etc.) Identifying genes linked to athleticism and other traits can only aid in scientific advancement. However, I don’t really understand why anyone would feel a strong desire to test their young child for the chromosome 11 ACTN3 gene? Okay, yes it is associated with alpha-actinin-3, and yes alpha-actinin-3 helps muscles have strong speedy movements, but is this test of great value to a parent? The president of the company goes on to say that the test doesn’t tell you 100% whether or not your child will shine athletically; so what exactly is the point of this test again?
ReplyDeleteWhy would I want to “select what may be the best sport” for my kid? Why would there need to be a “best” sport? Just because you’re good at something doesn’t mean you will enjoy doing it. Having this test be available DTC (Direct to Consumer) just seems to further the argument against having children tested. With DTC testing, a doctor will likely never have any involvement in suggesting that the test be taken or in evaluating the results, thus minimizing the actual significance. I would definitely not test my child for something as silly as this simply because the test results hold no significance whatsoever in my eyes. I don’t plan on being some sort of stage mom pushing my kids to be Olympic athletes. They can play a sport if they want to; if they have a strong passion for the sport and want to continue with it, they can try to work themselves to Olympic levels. Quite frankly it’s all up to what the kids want. I know this one individual who is an extremely talented athlete. She played multiple sports in school and outshined everyone, winning loads of awards, only to quit in the middle of it all because she hated playing sports. So, talent and desire go hand in hand for sports as they do for everything else in life; you have to know how to use your talent as well as WANT to use it.
This DTC testing is all simply another product trying to make something out of the internet shopping craze. If parents really want to discover the child’s athletic capabilities in terms of their genetics, then they should contact their family physician or a genetic counselor.
Some interesting points and images relating to the ACTN3 gene are on http://kohlmanngen677s13.weebly.com/
Initially reading this article, I thought that this genetic testing would be a good idea to see what sports you should put your children in so they will do well. Upon further thought, I realized that this might not be a great idea. Some parents will not think about this as a test to determine if they are capable of playing these sports, they might think that these tests determine their children will be Olympic sports players and push them towards competitive sports. The children will not be allowed to play the sports that they want but the ones that their parents think they should due to the genetic test results. The issue with this testing being direct to consumer is that the people who get the testing do not have to have a consultation with a health professional who can inform them of the proper way to use this test, they can make their own assumptions which can be very wrong. My advice to parents who are reading and thinking about trying these tests would be to do your research, find out who is running the tests, the specificity and sensitivity of the tests and realize that genes can do not necessarily mean you will be an Olympic sports player but you are more genetically prone to be a great player with proper training.
ReplyDeleteInitially I was somewhat offended by this article when I first read it. Growing up, I was a competitive figure skater, and really excelled in the sport because my motivation to be the best pushed me work harder than everyone else. Many of the girls that I competed against were more talented than I was, and were genetically capable of more than I was, however, they did not love the sport as much as I did, and therefore did not put in the time or effort into it the way that I did. Thus, I ranked higher than these genetically talented skaters because of my work ethic. As a result, I do not think that an individual’s genes solely determine whether or not they will be successful athletes. Chances are, had my genes been tested, I would not have the special ACTN3 gene variation, which would have discouraged me from working hard in skating and experiencing the success that I experienced because of skating. Had I been tested I would have thought that no matter how hard I worked, I never would be good enough because I was not genetically capable of being good enough.
ReplyDeleteFor parents who are not as genetically savvy as I am, they should definitely NOT allow their children to be tested for the ACTN3 gene variation. Those who are not as genetically savvy will take the meaning of the test results too seriously, and perhaps discourage parents from encouraging their children to accomplish their goals. For example, if a parent knows that their child is not genetically capable of being a MLB quality baseball player, he will not provide his child with the necessary resources to be the best that he can be, because going into it, the father knows that no matter how great his son will be, he is not genetically capable of being the best.
For parents unsure of how to utilize this service, I would tell them that the decision to have their child tested is dependent upon many factors. If a child grows up being phenomenal in a sport, perhaps genetic test results may make the child be too cocky about his abilities. On the other hand, it could also encourage a shy young child who is afraid of his own shadow, to be more confident in his abilities. Therefore, I think that the decision to test a child for the variant ACTN3 gene depends on the child’s natural abilities, and personality type. If the parent thinks that the child’s knowledge of having more athleticism will be beneficial then by all means, the child should be tested for this variant gene. However, if the parents think that the child will not benefit from this knowledge, then they should just leave well enough alone.
My initial reaction to this article is worry that the company, Atlas Sports Genetics, is not advertising to people to sell their screening with deceptive information. What I gather from this article is just information about this gene, ACTN3, and the small association it has to do with athletic performance. For parents who are not as genetically savvy as I am, I think many will be misinformed or will make assumptions about results about their children.
ReplyDeleteIf I were to give advice to those who are reading the article and thinking of trying the test for their children, I would first suggest them to read the article a few more times, and slowly. I would suggest to them to break down what the article is saying. In the end, I would tell them that this article did not mention that the ACTN3 gene is not directly related to athletic ability and people are still studying that genes as well as other genes are that associated to sports performance. If they wanted to test to see if their children have the gene, then by all means but I would warn them to not take the results and assume that their children will or will not be Olympians.
My initial reaction to this article is frustration. This test does not definitely determine anything other than the presence of muscle protein alpha-actinin-3. The test does not determine which sports a child could master. A child is capable of learning anything with proper training. Just because you may or may not have this muscle protein does not mean you can only play certain sports or do certain things. In addition to the presence of this muscle protein, environment also plays a role in the implications in its presence or absence. Any child should be able to do or not do what they like in terms of sports. For parents who may not have as much genetic knowledge, I think that this test could potentially cause parents to push their children into sports that they do not like or want to participate in just because a genetic test told them this may be what their child can excel at. Every parent wants what is best for his or her child and they may feel that this test could give their child the best chance at having a fulfilling lifestyle in athletics, possibly going to the Olympics. However, I don't feel that a child should be forced to do something such as a sport that does not make them happy or that they do not enjoy. This test is not a given. Just because a child may show a particular area of sports that the child could do well in, does not mean that they will for sure. The child may like a different sport of have different hopes and dreams. The advice I would give is to not let this test, if done, to be the determining factor in your child's life. Always put the child's wants and needs above your own and listen to what they have to say. Just because a certain muscle protein is present does not guarantee success as an athlete. There are so many more factors than one test that play into this that need to be considered just as much if not more than the results of one test.
ReplyDeleteMy initial reaction to this article was that in my opinion, it is pretty remarkable how modern scientific research is able to discover traits that are hereditable regarding people’s ability in sports performance. Moreover, the fact that a “DTC” service exists for this type of testing shows that there is a demand and highlights the fact that people are curious about this new technology.
ReplyDeleteIt is known that different sports utilize different muscles and physiological functions of the human body. For example, the existence of slow and fast twitch muscle fibers. There has been a theory which suggests that even though most people have about a 50/50 break down of fast and slow twitch muscle fibers, some people are more genetically blessed and are at a higher ratio on one end or the other (Burns, 2011). It is believed that one who has more slow twitch muscle fibers are better at endurance sports and one who has more fast twitch muscle fibers are better at rapid movement sports such as sprints and gymnastics (Burns, 2011). The theory of slow and fast twitch muscle fibers and how it might be a factor to whether one excels in endurance sports or sports involving rapid movement is no different to the theory that a child unable to make alpha-actinin-3 might excel at endurance sports compared to a child who is genetically able to make more alpha-actinin-3 and is said to set them for achievement in both power or endurance sports.
I think that parents who are not as “genetically savvy” might have the tendency to only rely on this test which may potentially determine what type of sport the parents might encourage the child to play in the future. However, I feel that in order for parents to be able to purchase this test for their child, their child must agree to this test first since they are primarily seeking genetic information of their child and not themselves. Secondly, this test should be given to the child only for his or her best interest – such as in determining a sport that their child should focus on in the future.
In my opinion, this test is beneficial in discovering the potential that a child could have. However, the test and results should be dealt with carefully, so as not to interfere and disrupt the overall mental, physical and development of the child. Additionally, there are some ethical concerns regarding this test since the test is performed on children less than 9 years old – children who are incapable of ultimately making there own informed medical decisions and who may not be aware of the test and it’s advantages and disadvantages.
Regarding advice to parents, I agree with the article’s statement saying that this as A TOOL not THE TOOL and is not the only performance indicator but may help suggest which sports children might excel in. Nonetheless, As much as athletic ability can be measured in data (e.g. DNA, speed and statistics), if in the end a child is particularly interested in a sport that he or she is not “naturally” gifted in, you know what they say: practice makes perfect.
Reference:
Burns , T. J. (2011, 03 11). Fast vs. slow twitch muscle fibers . Retrieved from http://www.oneresult.com/articles/training/fast-vs-slow-twitch-muscle-fibers
After learning about various muscle fibers in my anatomy and physiology classes it was interesting to read an article that explains how the ACTN3 gene can be tested for fast reacting muscle protein. However, keeping in mind the lessons learned in lecture about DTC genetic testing I became very weary of the article and its credibility. Atlas Sports Genetics is purely in the business of making money and marketing their product. The article barely referenced anyone that has a doctorate degree and is not a very reliable source of scientific knowledge. I personally enjoyed the comment that came from the website regarding the absence of the alpha-actinin-3 making protein that explained how a child can “excel at endurance sports such as cross-country skiing, distance running or swimming.” This instills hope for greatness within a parent so they can start training a child at a young age.
ReplyDeleteAfter a bit of investigating I did find a scientific article on PubMed that seemed to give the article some plausibility. Yang et. al explains how the ACTN3 gene can be good predictors of athletes on an Olympic level. (1) They hypothesized that this was due to natural selection and the variability of endurance and sprint athletes. In class I had learned about slow-twitch and fast twitch muscles so it was interesting to read that people have genetic predispositions and researchers have now found the gene. However, the article read for class lacks scientific integrity and paints a picture in parents’ heads that they can have control over whether their child will be an Olympian one day.
Parents that are not genetically savvy like myself, that find out that their child possesses this gene may sign their child up for intense workouts. As an athlete for many years, I know how parents can get with a “my child is the best” attitude. Now with this genetic test, people may think they have evidence to back this claim up. I would advise parents to proceed cautiously with the results of genetic testing. DTC testing is still fairly new and companies just want to make money. So before you send little Johnny to a collegiate track sleep-away camp for several months it would be best to ask your child if they enjoy playing that sport. Just because you have a genetic predisposition for something does not mean you will acquire the skills. Children should play sports because they enjoy it, not because parents think they could be raising the next Usain Bolt.
(1) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1180686/
Although this information is interesting the reality is that regardless of these genes there are too many other factors that come into play in regards to athletes, their performance, and success in sports. Parents may use this information to try to push their children into a certain profession or discourage them. People need to understand that not all athletes have the genes mentioned and not all people who do have them are athletes. The child may have a greater interest in fashion or law and have a failing athletic career because he was pushed into it. This is a genetic test that I would not spend my money on, especially due to the fact that there are some faults associated with it.
ReplyDeleteMy advice to the parents would be to avoid focusing on whether the child has an athletic gene or not. And for parents to get to know their children, their interests and goals and set out to provide them with the best tools to help them succeed. Some possible implications that I can see coming out of these genetic tests are: who owns the right to this genetic information and the probability for increased genetic discrimination in sports due to the results of this test. This company could easily have access to the genetic information of these children and could sell this information to the government or sports agents who want to invest in the future of a child who they see has the proper genetics to become an elite athlete. Lastly, this genetic test can lead to the possibility of genetic discrimination in sports of kids who do have the genetic make up to become an elite athlete against those who do not have the proper genetic make-up or those whose genetic make-up is unknown because they didn’t undergo this genetic test.
I have heard numerous times of how genetics plays a role in physical ability, most commonly regarding the ability to build muscle mass. People often put the blame on genetics for their body build which to some extent is valid. When it comes to sports I feel that genetics plays a much smaller role in determining a person's abilities. In sports that require a lot of motor skills it takes a lot more to be successful than to simply be physically gifted. Yes, having the ability to produce more speed and power definitely gives you an upper hand, but in sports such as soccer, pure speed and power alone will not make you an elite player. Endless hours of putting work into your skills is essential to becoming a "soccer, football, basketball player" rather than just an "elite athlete". It is necessary to know the difference between skill and athleticism when considering this topic.
ReplyDeleteI would caution parents when deciding whether to have their child get this test because I firmly believe that with out proper work ethic, the child's genes alone will not get him very far in athletics. I would be wary that children who tested positive for the ACTN3 gene might have a feeling that they are predisposed to become an elite athlete and can be greatly disappointed if they don't. This test could also negatively affect a child's work ethic whether they test positive or negative because children with the gene might have a sense that they don't need to put in as much work as others and children with out the gene might think it is useless to even try to become an elite athlete without ACTN3.
Also, if more concrete evidence shows that ACTN3 does improve performance and people begin genetically modifying their children to obtain this gene, I feel that the integrity of sports will be compromised. Having these abilities to genetically modify your child so that he/she has an upper hand is no different than using steroids or other performance enhancing drugs, in my opinion. I feel that this would ruin the traditions of the respective sports.
My initial reaction to Atlas Sports Genetics offering a test of gene variants in children younger than 9 years old is that it may not matter if the child has the ACTN3 gene variation found in elite- and Olympic athletes. The tests were only done on elite- and Olympian athletes and not all of them had the gene variation, so there are exceptions. Parents should be careful when getting DTC genetic testing for their children. Who supports the specific test and company, its accuracy, and results are the most important things to look at when visiting a website that offers genetic testing. I would tell the parents to look for signs of false advertisement on the website. Even the company admits its not a full proof predictive test. It's just more likely that with the variation, a child can and will perform better at certain types of sports. Some children are determined to be the best and put in the hours of practice that make up for lake of natural or genetic abilities. Even if a child is "predisposed" to being a good cross country runner, does not mean parents should force their child to be a runner or only do sports that require a lot of aerobic work. Children get involved in sports for the love of the game, so if they are just put in a sport because their parents and a test say they should do it, the fun and enjoyment will be taken out of the game and involvement.
ReplyDeleteNot only do i think this test is aimed at making a profit from parents, but I also think that this test implies and promotes a very image driven society. Playing sports helps children with cognitive fuctioning and learning values, like teamwork, and hardwork. However, not playing sports does not hinder you from developing these values or streghtening cognitive function. the scientists have said they do no know a lot about ACTN3 gene. If you will look at many athletes today, most, if not all would tell you that they do no know if they have this gene or if it even mattered in their desire to play sportsd or excel in them. My parents put me in several sports, including swimming. If I did not like swimming I would not have put the amount of effort in practicing that I did. With practice I became better and better. My parents did not care about any predictor gene, they only care about my happiness. This is what parents should be worried about, not only how athletic they could be. Kevin Reilly states that this test should not be used as a determining factor as to whether a child will exell at a particular sport. regardless if parents do not use the test in that manner, a negative result could change a childs willingness to participate in certain sports or alter the feffort they put forth.
ReplyDeleteThe article mentions that this test is best for predicting the athletic potential of children under 9 years old. The fact that this test is recommended for children at such a young age is mind blowing. At 9 years old children are just starting to play sports and express interest in organized athletic activities. To use a genetic test to place a child in a particular sport at such a young age seem ludicrous because there are so many factors other than genetics that contribute to someone’s success in a sport. What if the child would rather take art lessons or join the debate team? What if the child tests for having the endurance combination of the ACTN3 alleles but he or she goes to a school where there is no long-distance running team? What if the child has the ACTN3 gene but is overweight?
ReplyDeleteThe possible environmental factors that would influence the phenotype of ACTN3 are numerous. It is unnecessary to list them all. The important point is that the alleles the child has at 9 years old for this gene are so minor it seems irrelevant. There are plenty of successful athletes without this gene, and there are plenty of people with this gene who are not athletic.
A genetic test for the ACTN3 gene is a way to rip off overzealous parents with extra money to waste. Rather than serving as a discussion of scientific discovery, this article is more of a social commentary on the competitive and selfish desire of countless parents to have extremely successful and famous children. I would encourage parents who are less genetically savvy to really think about what information they could learn from this genetic test, what they will do with this information, and how it might change their parenting goals and their relationship with their children.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this article I am initially very skeptical, for several reasons. The validity and reliability of the tests are questionable. As stated by the president of Atlas Sports Genetics, the test is not a “final word” on whether a child will be gifted with certain sports abilities. It is difficult to determine exactly how various factors interact, as well as how influential genes are in determining athletic ability. Additionally, results from the test may not be as applicable to young children as older elite athletes. I also think it would be difficult to divide and delineate certain sports from others and to have certain abilities/proficiencies with certain sports align and correspond with gene variants accurately. It needs to be kept in mind that the test shows the presence (or lack thereof) of a protein. Furthermore, the proposed association between athletic ability and the ACTN3 protein is used to validate the test.
ReplyDeleteSimilar to Myriad Genetics and the BRCA1 gene tests, the financial incentive is very obvious with the company. The test – a saliva test (!) – costs $149. The company’s website isn’t very sophisticated or appealing, which is surprising as one article (1) asserts that marketing is leading the research (of genetic tests). Testimonials from previous consumers are featured on the website as well.
More – probably most – importantly I am very skeptical about parents’ intentions and motives for choosing to utilize such genetic tests. I find it difficult trying to understand why parents feel the need to know and attempt to mold their children and their abilities at a very young age. This leads to underestimating and neglecting the role of other factors such as the environment.
Parents’ access to DTC genetic tests has the potential of breeding misunderstanding of genes and genetic testing. Parents would likely only want to emphasize and focus on the results of the genetic test and not consider other factors beyond the scope of a genetic test. It cannot be assumed that the DTC genetic tests provide access to an actual genetic counselor or HCP who can help interpret the results of the test. This could further lead to parents jumping to conclusions and making dramatic changes with how they raise their children.
To parents reading and thinking of having their children undergo this kind of genetic testing, I would emphasize and encourage that they allow their children to explore various sports and hobbies “naturally”, without the guide of a genetic test’s results. Parents should question and reassess their reasons for considering a genetic test. I would also encourage parents to reserve the use of a genetic test in situations with a certain medical foundation or pathology (e.g. BRCA1 gene test -> breast and ovarian cancer).
(1) Collier, R. (2012). Genetic tests for athletic ability. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3255226/
Being an athlete here at BU, I played three sports in high school that required a plethora of athletic abilities. I believe the sports that children come to specialize in or play when they become teenagers has more to do with the environment they grew up in and the sports that their parents subjected them to than a genetic trait. I do believe that genes play a role in inheriting some athletic ability but that is developed through hard work and motivation to become better rather than having a gene that predisposes you to being better at certain sports. Besides, as stated in the article, "this is a tool, not the tool". The test of the ACTN3 allele and the variants of it could very much distinguishing if you would be better at playing wood wind instruments versus percussion. I feel like that is part of our culture that children are exposed to a multitude of sports as children and if an interest develops, they pursue a greater excellence in the sport and a genetic test would be useless. At $149, it also seems as if the company's main goal is money.
ReplyDeleteI too played three different sports growing up, and I agree that I wouldn't be the athlete I am now if I had specialized at a young age. However I think it is important to note that most people choose a sport to specialize in because they are good at that specific sport. To use myself as an example, I chose hockey because I enjoy it, and am better at it than I was at soccer and baseball. Now I was probably better at Hockey because I spent more time practicing it, and because I learned certain skills from baseball and soccer that helped me become a better hockey player. I'm not sure if I would be the same athlete I am today if I was told to specialize at a young age. I will say I probably would have got burned out a whole lot faster if my genes suggested I only play hockey
DeleteMy initial reaction to this article is very mixed. On one hand, the test has the advantage of providing a way for the environment to be conducive to genetic capabilities early on. I wonder how many people who were capable of becoming an Olympic athlete never did because they never set foot on a track, never swung a baseball bat, or never put on a pair of skis. If this test detects that someone has the ACTN3 variation, incorporating sports into their life as a child could put them well on their way to excelling at an elite level in the future.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I feel that the downsides of this test outweigh any benefits it might have. I agree with this quote from the article: "It's a question of their motivation. This is a tool, not the tool." A number of other ingredients go into superior athletic ability besides a person's genetic makeup. Someone with the ACTN3 variation may not necessarily become a great athlete if they don't train regularly, don't eat well, or don't perform well when faced with competition. I worry about the parents who think that the test is predictive of their child's future athletic ability. In the case that the child does have the genetic variation, their parents might force a sports-oriented environment that isn't in the child's best interest. On the flip side, parents might not bother encouraging their child to participate in sports if they don't have the variation, though I'm sure there are elite athletes who don't have the variation either.
The bottom line is that society values success too highly sometimes. It's not a tragedy if someone who is genetically capable of becoming a great athlete decides to take a different path in life. And so what if a kid doesn't have the ACTN3 variation? It doesn't mean they shouldn't work hard at a sport they love. It's important for parents to remember that this genetic test is not the sole determinant of athletic ability, and that regardless of the results, kids should be given options to try different things and find what they like best naturally.
My initial reaction to this paper was that it's actually kind of sad that parents would want to perform this genetic screening test on their children. The article mentions that no one really knows for sure how much genes affect determine our genetic ability, and that the researchers have no idea if ACTN3 contributes to performing at anything, but an elite level. A concern I have while reading this article is that, parents may get discouraged if they find out that their child does not have ACTN3, and may therefore not try to encourage them to be the best they can be at sports. If parents begin testing their children for physical ability, what else will they start testing their children for? Intelligence?
ReplyDeleteMany parents may not be aware of the implications associated with Direct To Consumer genetic screening tests. They need to be aware that these genetic tests are not that accurate, and that different companies may offer them different results. In addition, these tests can be costly. An advice I would give to parents reading this article is to not get their child tested for this gene, but instead to love their child for who they are. Being an Olympic performer is not the most important thing in the world.
This was definitely an interesting article that gave insight into the genetic influence of athletic capability, and the screening technology to possibly predict athleticism. The company may offer to screen to find out what type of possibly athlete a child may become based on the different combinations of the ACTN3 gene; however, I remain unconvinced based on the answers provided by their featured source, Stephen Roth. He believes that it is impossible to certainly quantify athleticism, and the screening only offers a small predictor of genetic influence on the muscle. He further explains how there are 200 genes that are currently being cataloged that are related to fitness and performance. Therefore, I don't believe that a single gene has the predictive power to determine athleticism as a whole. Also, the test results, according to Roth, will not even indicate if this gene will influence athleticism in children. The research seems to be unclear. I feel that much is unknown in this area of genetics, and to package and sell a test that may influence a child to be raised in a certain way may not be ethical. I also believe that along with the possible 200 genes related to performance and fitness, that epigenetic factors play a role in genetic athleticism. Environmental conditions can certainly influence what genes are activated or turned off. Therefore, the lack of a certain gene may not explain future athleticism as a whole. Roth also indicates that there is a possibility of altering a genetic profile to enhance performance in the future. The ethical "dark zone" may not be enough to prevent companies from offering these services. Which may ultimately effect the integrity of professional sports. Overall, I feel more research is needed, and that ACTN3's effect on muscle may not be the determining factor in predicting athletic capability.
ReplyDeleteAs a former varsity collegiate athlete, I was I very intrigued by this article at first glance. Growing up I was not the naturally “athletic kid,” or the one who rose to the top of gym class dodge ball games, but found my niche upon joining the rowing team in high school. I cannot deny the fact that my genes did play a factor in my ability to be a competitive rower because my height and long limbs were considered advantageous for crew. Therefore, I am not necessarily inclined to dismiss the potential impact of the ACTN3 gene on future athletic performance. According to Stephen Ross, an assistant professor of exercise physiology, aging and genetics at the University of Maryland that was interviewed for the article, “as much as 50 percent of muscle strength is determined by genetic factors.“ Genes can clearly impact the development of athletic enhancing attributes, but I believe they are not the sole factor.
ReplyDeleteDespite the intrigue of this positive single genetic factor, I can also attest to the fact, that genes can negatively effect athletic ability as well. For example, I had a genetic predisposition to chondromalacia, a condition which effects cartilage in joints. Considering this reality, I believe it is important to remember genetic factors can hinder athletic ability just as profoundly as enhance them. One must also consider the profound role an athlete’s mentality plays in athletic development. I believe the mentality of an athlete dictates just how much they are able to utilize their physical attributes. It would be fascinating to study the genetic connection to the formation of cognitive function and thoughts related to athletics.
Reading the comments of my classmates above, I believe Jeremy Meltzer was prudent to quote the Atlas Sports Genetics' president, Kevin Reilly saying, "This is a tool, not the tool." Like other Direct-to-Consumer genetic testing products, the scope of use should be considered in context of a broader perspective. For users who are not familiar with the nuances of genetic testing, this ability to put the results of the gest into the framework of a larger perspective may be compromised. I would advice any parents that this test is merely a small piece of a large puzzle. I would also encourage them to make sure their child is healthy, both mentally and physically, for athletics should be means for health and happiness.
Like several other students, this article leaves me with mixed feelings. Similar to the "cheating gene," there is a difference between correlation and causation. Just because a child has the gene does not guarantee they will be very athletic. Also, I'm sure there will be plenty of cases where children who do not screen for this gene are just as athletic as those who do.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, there are ethical issues. If parents are screening their children so young for this gene, they may push them into pursuing sports or athletic activities that the child may not want to do. If they know they have this predisposition, it could lead to several emotional possibilities if sports are something they are not interested in, like guilt or failure.
Also, as Ive mentioned in other blogs, I feel nature is not the only determining factor of an individual. Nurture in my opinion can play a much larger role. This applies to this situation as well. Growing up in an environment where athletic ability is encouraged, or growing up with several athletes in the family, or as the child of a coach can all play a role in one's athletic abilities. While the gene may be a tool for athletic ability, there are many other factors to take into account.
I found the article, and the science behind the article, intriguing but I find the service disappointing. I felt disappointed in the parents who would actually be ordering the test for their young children. $149 is relatively inexpensive (especially for parents who are paying loads more for sporting equipment and spots on club teams for their children) so I see the draw to have the test done whether definitive results are given or not. But, with that said, there are so many more factors that play a larger role in the athletic success of children and teens--a supportive network of friends and family to serve as a fan base, a knowledgeable coach with great interpersonal skills, training partners, motivations, and the feeling of accomplishment along the way.
ReplyDeleteThere are implications for this kind of test as well. I mean think about it, the child might be striving to be an Olympian, but there are hardly over 500 athletes in the US across all sports that take part in each Olympic games. It's okay to strive for that, but let's be realistic. Before we get to that level (where this data plays a larger role) let's think about other implications. For example, what if the child wants to be an endurance athlete but then finds out that he doesn't have the XX variation. At the middle school and high school level, it's other factors (first being effort and focus on training) that play a much larger role in success and the proteins in the muscles. This gene is only 1 of 200 that are catalogued to play a role in athleticism so it's clearly not a be-all answer. Also, personally, I think this information could eb harmful for a child's self-esteem by setting expectations for the child that are not fair. Did the child ask for this genetic information? Is the child mature enough to find out that he will never make the Olympics in the 100m dash so he should start training for ultra marathons? I don't think so. I think this information is just one piece of the puzzle with many exceptions. Save your money--this test doesn't give you any solid heads up on the playing field, just more head aches and tough conversations later.
I found it difficult to take a stance on this genetic testing. On the one hand it is, as many have previously pointed out, a direct to consumer genetic test. The merits of this test a fairly questionable however if there is indeed a link between the ACTN3 and athletic performance I do see it being of some use to potential athletes. However, this test is being marketed to parents to help them decide which sports would be compatible with their child's genetic make up. I find that ridiculous, not on the part of the company, on the part of the parents. The results of a test should not be the deciding factor in a child's choice to play a sport. It should be the child's love of the sport. If a child enjoys a sport, they will work hard to excel at it. A child that doesn't love a sport wont. The ACTN3 gene wont have any effect on desire and work ethic which are more important in athletics than anything else. This test may be a tool for parents, but I dont think it is a tool that provides any real benefit to parents or their children
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteIt's both interesting and a bit disconcerting that this gene test is being made available as a direct-to-consumer test for parents. It is certainly fascinating the the growing plethora of information on genetics allows us to make this sort of prediction into how the muscles of different individuals will function based on variations of this one gene. However, the fact that the testing is offered directly to parents does make me a little nervous for several reasons: as is usually the case, this testing could be dangerous in that individuals who opt to have their child's genes tested could be taking the results to mean something much more significant that the reality; additionally it encourages parents to force children at a young age to enter into the world of exercise with a very mature outlook, when really sports for children, I believe, should be for fun. The article does a could job of presenting warnings regarding how these results should be interpreted, but should stress more that this is only one small piece of the picture. Many components influence someone's athletic ability and I don't believe this testing should be given a larger role than it actually has. This is what I would present in my comments to those reading the article. Additionally, I would recommend that those interested in the testing take a look at what other research is out there on genetic influences on athletic ability before electing to use this test. It would be interesting to see what association this ACTN3 gene variation has with different successful athletes today, in order to give us a better idea of its influence.
This article was a very interesting read, to think that we have the ability to perform a genetic test on a person to predict what sport they will be most competitive at is incredible. I think the aim of this product is a bit skewed. It seems like the ACTN3( A protein that makes muscles contract at a high speed that is found in many Olympians) test is being marketed to the overly obsessed sideline parents that are trying to live vicariously through their children and are driven to make their child the best at whatever sport they play. But in my experience I have always found that hard work beats talent when talent doesn't work hard; so even though a child may have a gene that makes them naturally good at a sport; if they are not interested and willing to put in hard work, they will not succeed. Ultimately the child will choose what sport they want to play and how successful they will be, a genetic test cannot determine any of this. In the article it was mentioned that this ACTN3 does not even matter unless you are at an olympic level of competition, so even though children may have this gene they would have to reach an olympic level for it to even matter, so the issue always cycles back to, intrest, hard work and commitment. If any athlete does not have those features they will not succeed, no matter what genes they possess.
ReplyDeleteInitially I found that this article did not provide much convincing evidence that genetics plays a role in sports performance. It seems that the gene with that could potentially have the most prominent effect on performance is ACTN3. The gene codes for a lack of a particular protein in muscles. A lack of this protein can cause muscles to not perform optimally which could lead to reduced athletic performance. I am skeptical about the fact that a genetic test must be done in order to determine the presence of ACTN3 in the muscle.
ReplyDeleteDTC tests offer simple means of obtaining results. However, they are often expensive, inconclusive and impossible to interpret without consultation with a doctor/ genetic counselor. Also, the tests do not take into account other personal health factors such as lifestyle choices. The research does not state the environmental factors that might influence protein production. Additionally, it does not state other health concerns that might result from a lack of protein production.
For those who are considering the test, I would recommend that parents keep an open mind in relation to the results. As Kevin Reilly stated in the article, “this is a took not the tool.” Ultimately, the results can only provide a basic recommendation for which sport a child may excel at. This is not to say that the child will be interested in playing the sport or that other health factors won’t prevent the child from being involved in it. Socially, mentally and even financially, there are other factors involved that will need to be considered before testing. I would also advise parents to have a conversation with the child to determine their interest level in sports before making a decision to undergo the test. Parents should ultimately be cautious with this test as the ACTN3 gene as athletic ability may not just be determined by the presence or absence of a protein.
My initial reaction to this article is that this test is being falsely marketed to parents. This company, Atlas Sports Genetics, makes it seem as if having your child tested for the ACTN3 gene will solve the mystery of which recreational sports to sign your child up for. No longer will children play a variety of sports, such as soccer in the fall, basketball in the winter, and baseball/softball in the spring. Rather parents can get this test and pick the sport their child is most likely to excel in, rather then letting the child pick which sport he or she enjoys playing the most. It may seem like a steal to get this test done for a mere $149, but in reality it’s a scam. As Stephen Roth points out, there is not a single gene that can test for a child’s potential athletic performance. Roth states that 200 genes have already been discovered to have a link to athletic performance and that is just scratching the surface of the 20,000 genes in the human genome. As has been discussed in lecture, a majority of people lacks a sufficient knowledge on the topic of genetics and the human genome. With the growing availability of DTC, parents who lack sufficient knowledge in this field are subject to a great deal loose correlations between genes and traits and false feedback that may negatively impact themselves and their children in the future.
ReplyDeleteIf I were leaving a comment under this article, I would advise parents to read this article carefully, especially the section with the interview with Stephen Roth. Furthermore, parents who choose to have this test done on their child or who are considering having this test done should consult with a genetic counselor or a physician about what the results of this test imply. Having a good working knowledge on this test is key in understanding what this genetic test means for their child. Parents should keep an open mind and allow their child to explore all of the different opportunities to participate in sports. You never know, the child may excel in a sport the parents never even considered.
When I read the title of the article I found myself agreeing that genetics can in fact contribute to each persons athletic ability. However, I was not thinking that there was a specific gene that predicts a person being a good or bad athlete, let alone a genetic test for it. I have heard of determining the type of athlete someone will be by their muscle fiber structures when it comes to running but I think this gene variant may be a little bit of a stretch. The article also says that the test is not definitive. The gene, along with many other factors, therefore contributes to a person being a good athlete. So this gene gives these people an advantage athletically? According to the article the association of the ACTN3 gene and performance is unclear. It may only be of advantage to those who will be future Olympic athletes, which is not very likely for the common person. I believe this test is wasting money and resources. If parents start to have there kids tested for this gene it could have many negative consequences. The children that do have the gene could be forced into athletic programs for which they have no passion or motivation to be involved in. The children without the gene may even be discouraged from playing something that they truly enjoy. This can lead to the test being misused and parents selectively choosing to have their child tested and then therefore also choosing their athletic interests as well.
ReplyDeleteIt is important for parents to evaluate all of the facts. It may be interesting to know if your child has this gene, but is it really in their best interest to find out? In the end it is not about whether or not they will become a famous athlete, but it is about their love for the sport and the happiness that comes along with that. Athletes today are being pushed too hard as it is. Many do not enjoy their sport anymore because of the pressure placed on them. This would only increase if children start to be tested for this gene.
Shereen Teymour
ReplyDeleteI feel as though this is a very interesting article, but due to the fact that many parents are uneducated when it comes to the role genetics and environment play in the outcome of a child’s athletic and educational performance, it is possible that some parents may be prone to taking the results of this test too seriously. There are so many far more important issues in the world, such as predisposition to cancer and other life threatening diseases, to be worrying about rather than what sport a child will excel in. It is not even proven to be 100% accurate and uneducated parents may take the results too far by putting unnecessary pressure on their child. In my opinion, children should chose a sport or extracurricular activity based on where their passion lies, not on what they are genetically predisposed to “maybe or maybe not” excel in. This puts too much emphasis on the effects of our genes and not enough on the role environmental factors play on a child’s performance. In a sense the article does make a valid point that the genotype determines the different amount and types of proteins we produce, which in turn, affects our athletic potential and performance. Our physical and genetic makeup definitely does have an affect on our capability to excel in certain sports; therefore whether a person has more fast twitch muscle fibers versus slow twitch muscle fibers will affect the outcome of their performance in sports. However, this is only one aspect of being successful in sports (or any aspect of life for that matter). If someone is naturally smarter than another person, it does not necessarily mean they will perform better in school. A person’s work ethic, motivation to practice, and passion for something also plays a huge role in mastering a sport.
This sort of unnecessary genetic analysis can also open doors to many other controversial testing that may become available in the future. Where will the line be drawn on what genetic tests determine a persons’ future? Can this be the gateway test that will lead to a society, similar to the movie Gattaca (1997) that analyzes your DNA and determines where you belong in life?
Since this test is DTC there is a high possibility that parents will misinterpret the data provided to them or take the results more seriously than intended. This could lead to parents putting unnecessary pressure on their child to engage in a specific sport that they are not even guaranteed to excel in. In my opinion, a major part of being exceptionally well at a sport is having a love for it and if a child is pressured into doing something they may dislike it and have no motivation to practice.
The advice I would give to parents who are considering having their child tested for variants of the ACTN3 gene is not to take the results too seriously. This is to prevent high hopes, expectations, pressure, and disappointment of the child’s results that indicate a genetic advantage in a particular type of sport. Like I mentioned earlier, parents should be more worried about the health of their child rather than what sport they will be successful in.
Initially, when I read this article, I thought it was a very interesting topic. However, by the end of the article, I thought it was a little silly that researchers have made this connection between genetics and athletic ability. Sure, testing for ACTN3 can screen for the muscle protein alpha-actinin-3 which elite-level athletes just so happen to have, however, I would say this is just correlation and not causation.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, even if people have this gene, maybe there are other genes that counter it. For example, maybe there are other genes that cancel out ACTN3 or a gene that makes someone more artistic too. If someone had a gene to be extremely artistic, would a parent steer their child to be an artist or an athlete? Therefore, I do not think such gene can be the defining factor in someone’s talent.
Additionally, there is the issue of what you’re interested in and what you’re genetically made to be good at. I don’t think it is ethical for a parent to make their child play soccer, when their child wants to play basketball or perhaps not even a sport. On the other hand, what if the child doesn’t have the gene to be athletic at anything but wants to play a sport? In this case, I still don’t think it is ethical for a parent to hold a child back from what their child is interested in.
Since this available “DTC,” parents should be more educated on genomics and DTC tests before they want to screen for their child or themselves for any gene. Not only are many companies just trying to make money, but many tests are not accurate due to misinterpretations and bias. As a result, the question of ethics wouldn’t be the problem, but the information parents are making their decisions off of would be false.
Therefore, for those who are reading and thinking of trying to test for their children, I would advise them not to. Not only is there an issue of ethics but there is also an issue of the reliability and validity of DTC tests. It may also be my personal belief in fate, but I would tell parents to accept their children for who they are. Whether it pertains to their talents, their health, or their inherited physical attributes, parents should not interfere with what their children are born to be and should allow nature to take its course.
My initial reaction to this article was that I am a bit skeptical that athletic performance of a child can be foretold by a gene. Testing for the ACTN3 gene, which is associated with the presence of a muscle protein that helps the muscle contract powerfully, does not take into consideration lifestyle choices which are also related with athletic performance.
ReplyDeleteThe problem that may be encountered with this test which is "DTC" is that parents who administer it to their children may misinterpret the results and take the results of this test very seriously. This may lead to parents forcing their children into sports and putting enormous amounts of pressure on them to perform better than other kids because of the results of this test.
The advice I would give parents who are thinking about getting their children tested for the ACTN 3 gene would be to consult with a genetic counselor about what the results really mean and ask about how lifestyle choices also factor into athletic performance.
I think this test is rather unnecessary, especially since it's being directed towards children. I worry that the results of this test might dissuade some children from pursuing athletics, or alter their sports-related choices. I did find it surprising that genes have about a 50% influence on your muscle strength, but genetics aren't the only factor that contributes to performance. I think this test gives those who are unfamiliar with genetics the impression that they are the only factor, or that they are at least the dominant factor. However, the article also said that any athletic deficiencies would only be noticeable at the Olympic level. If this is the case, why is this test being directed at children when they are so young?
ReplyDeleteAt this point, these genes only shed light on muscle strength, which is only one component of sports performance. I would advise parents to not let this be the deciding factor that determines what sport their child should play. 7, 8 , and 9 year olds should play whichever sports they want to, not the ones that a test recommends based on their genetic makeup. I think because this is a DTC product, the results will be misinterpreted often. And, I think the availability of this test fosters the pressure and overly-competitive nature of the sports environment, which will be harmful for such young children.
The danger is that parents who intend their children to be olympic athletes may use the test as the definitive factor for whether a child has a chance in succeeding in the Olympic games; while Kevin Reilly stresses that it is "a tool, not the tool" to gauge performance, I think parents may stress the test's significance. This may be, however, only relevant to parents who want their children to succeed at the olympic level.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Kelly G's first paragraph, I would still think that the majority of parents would not be dissuaded into having their child participate in sports. The factors that I, personally, have heard as to why children are placed into sports programs are discipline, exercise, and social interactions-- none of which are affected by whether or not the rs4950 genotype is present.
Therefore I think this test may be a beneficial thing, as it may persuade parents who still intend for their children to be Olympians to enter a sport that doesn't necessarily require the same amount of fast-twitch fiber muscle.
I found this article to be quite interesting, but also was overwhelmed with the amount of ethical concerns regarding this genetic test. As we’ve learned in class, the DTC availability status of genetic tests can be agents of deception and guilty of misleading result.
ReplyDeleteWithout prior knowledge of the reputation of DTC genetic testing companies, I could foresee parents easily succumbing to the marketing tactics of consumer appeal. If I were to leave a comment under the article I would probably try to educate them on the way that DTC genetic tests gather their information and pose the ethical consequences that might arise from receiving the results of the ACTN3 gene variant test in the following way.
I am glad that the company’s president emphasized their test as “a tool not the tool”. This is very important to keep in mind when analyzing the results of genetic tests such as this one. Although convenient and relatively inexpensive, the DTC option is often associated with flashy yet deceptive marketing, questionable practices and misleading test results. Because their information is gathered via data mining, a process which bases results off of published articles, the validity of these tests are greatly reduced and the frequency of false positives or negatives are common. It would behoove you to conduct further independent research on the test and company to find out if a physician and scientist are involved in this test.
As far as ethics are concerned, the best case scenario that I can envision involves minimal risk. The child gets tested for the gene variant and enrolls in the selected sport. However, there are several social rights that have the potential for violation. Psychological harm is perhaps the most obvious. It seems that if a child did possess the ACTN3 gene variant, they would be subjected to unnecessary psychological stresses and pressure associated with their athletic predisposition.
Another factor is the right to be ignorant of one’s future. Unlike most everyone else on earth, those tested for this gene variant will be robbed of the ignorance of their future. They will not have the same luxury of old-fashioned self-discovery that the rest of us had.
Thirdly, an issue of consent is raised. The results of the ACTN3 genetic variant test on a child’s athletic predisposition, if taken seriously, can potentially alter their life course. Because of this, I find it alarming the child’s autonomy isn’t taken into greater consideration. Children aged 9 years or younger do not possess the capacity to grasp the repercussions of their choice regardless of the amount of information provided to them beforehand.
And Finally, much like the film Gattaca, there is danger that the test will diminish respect or increase discrimination for others who are not born with the gene variant.
Although genetic testing to discover more about how our genome affects the life of a human, it seems quite unnecessary and somewhat unethical to be testing children this early to predetermine what sports they should play based on their genes. Nine year olds do not understand the concept of how their genome will play into their lives, and learning what genome they are could be a dramatic change in their life. Even though the ACTN3 gene is interesting to learn about, I would like to see how the technology could be applied to other situations. The technology is quite interesting, and the fact that they only need a saliva sample to determine how the gene will react is quite remarkable. This method should be extended to determining what our other genes are capable of and how this could possibly help to stop disease and prevent illness.
ReplyDeleteThis testing does serve as a trouble for kids who are not informed about what genetic testing is and what it means for their child. Parents who are informed about what attributes their child has or might not have may change the way they teach their kids and what sports they decide to have their kids join. Parents who are looking into what ACTN3 gene should be informed by the company (whether it be Atlas Sports Genetics or something else) about how certain genes may effect their family life.
For the kids who are reading the article, I would say that regardless of which athletic talents they possess, whatever sport they want to excel in is their choice. Their choice of athletics should not depend on how they are built athletically, but what they are most passionate about. Talent is built upon hard work and passion, and being genetically better at a skill does not mean that will be their choice of sport.
My initial reaction to this article was that it's surprising how almost anything anyone does in daily life can be linked to genetics. The only problem with this is that the mystery of what one can achieve is no longer a mystery. Hard work and potential no longer become factors. It would be like giving a genetic test on Einstein and determining that his genetics reveal that he is only as intelligent as the average human. If Einstein was genetically tested and told that he will only be an average intellectual, then he may not have had as much of an impact as he did. An example of athletic performance can be seen in Michael Phelps. Although it is unsure of whether or not he has the ACTN3 gene, it can be seen that he has long legs and a wide wingspan. This makes him perfect for swimming. If he was tested for the ACTN3 gene and was found to not have the muscle enhancement, then he may have never pursued his swimming career, and would not have helped America dominate in swimming. Ultimately, the gene does not define the person, especially in regards to athletic ability. There is too much to account for when looking at athletics, that faster muscle contraction just may not account for. This concept should be accounted for when parents think about genetically testing their children, especially since this genetic test is DTC. Parents shouldn't subject their children to such tests because it will stigmatize them. Readers of this article should also be aware of the concept that other factors are involved in athletic ability other than muscle contraction speed.
ReplyDeleteGreat point Robert! The discussion you made about Einstein and what would have happened if he were given a genetic test is a very interesting idea. Its just like if someone were to see a fortune teller and be told what their "future" will hold...even if the fortune teller's reading is not all too significant, it may still plant some seed of doubt or lack of determination/desire in the mind of the individual. This ultimately affects a person's character and how they decide to live their life.
DeleteI cannot say that I agree with what this article is saying. To be honest I think this test is a ludicrous idea. Genetically testing children at the age of 9 for athletic ability is absurd. Children playing sports at such a young age should be able to pick whatever sport they are interested in, not one that they are genetically going to excel at. Kids at this age are still developing and maturing into their bodies. You cant rely on or let some test results be the deciding factor of a child being a good athlete or not. As an athlete myself, it’s all about the dedication, commitment, and hard work that lets one excel at whatever sport it is one is playing not some gene. Therefore, testing positive or negative for this gene doesn’t indicate ones ability as an athlete.
ReplyDeleteMy advice to those parents who are trying to get athletic genetic testing for their child would be not to do it. A genetic test is not going to determine whether or not your child is going to be a good athlete or not, or excel at one sport more than another. What I would do is reiterate to parents that there are so many factors that make up a good athlete and genetic testing is not one of them. I don’t think we should be relying on the DTC tests to determine whether or not children are athletic.
My initial reaction to this article was that this is merely an unnecessary test that is being generated by Atlas Sports, profit making as a probably forerunner. Kevin Reilly himself states that it isn't the sole determinant of whether or not a child will excel in athletics, so my gut would question the intentions of this company. It is correct that children that are this young do not have the physical maturity and motor skills to determine their qualifications which is why i think it would be unfair to test these children because I believe in turn it would create a pressure from the parents on these children to do well. In terms of the DTC availability, I agree with my fellow peers in stating that they can be extremely deceiving and questionable, especially when the testing companies aren't well reputable.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the article did in fact state that this test focusess on association rather than causation, not everyone understands the meaning of that. I think that some parents might see this as a way for them to test the success their child could potentially have which in turn can lead to unwanted pressure on a child. Especially for parents who are not as savvy, and do not completely understand that these tests aren't the sole determinant of the ability of a child to perform. This might also lead to the parents pushing their child to focus on one specific sport (the one they tested strongly for) and not exactly allow their child to play the field, so to speak. The child may not be given the opportunity or chance to see what they enjoy the most rather than what they excel in.
Like the article said, this test should not be used as THE tool but more as A tool if to be used at all. In my opinion, however, i would stray parents away from this test and let their child find a niche on their own. This has the potential for unnecessary pressure and expectations for both the child and parent. My reasoning behind this is that I believe genetic testing should be limited in terms of what it can do to benefit an individual. As remarkable as it may seem to just take a swab from a cheek to determine a childs motivation, it can also be detrimental. Genetic testing has been successful and with advancing technology it will continue to be helpful in disease prevention and treatments, so I think this technology should somehow be applied to that area rather than creating predetermined futures.
My initial reaction is doubt as to the usefulness of this genetic test. When I think of genetics, I think of the interaction of multiple genes and epigenetic factors to create a result, whereas this test only looks at variants of the ACTN3 gene. It is like studying anatomy where you only study the individual piece when you should be studying how multiple pieces work together to make up the structure or organism.
ReplyDeleteI believe that parents who order this test think that they will get results that will tell them if their child has a gift for certain sports, but what this test really does is tells you if you have the specified protein. The makers of the test have no idea if this contributes to performing at anything but an elite level, and even this has its contradictions and is lacking in solid evidence, so the test in no way tells you what you can or cannot achieve. The test also fails to tell you about other factors that may affect your muscle performance, such as metabolism or cardiovascular performance, which are equally as important.
The way the test is presented makes it very appealing for parents. The $149 cost seems very miniscule and easily expendable if it can potentially tell you about your child’s future NFL career. Nowadays when people need and want ever y advantage they can get to achieve the future that they want, this test seems like a tool in helping them achieve that future and is marketed to those people that want the edge. But once again, this test cannot tell you everything you would need to know because the technology and knowledge does not exist to predict that yet. It is hard or downright impossible for companies to tell consumers that they do not know something or if they have doubts in a test, because then no one will buy it. People want to know that they can do something and are looking for a test to tell them that they can do it to assure them, and this test will do just that.
If I were to advise parents, I would say that this test paints only a small portion of the bigger picture. This test only looks at the variants of one gene, so it is missing other genes and cannot show you the interaction of the aggregation of genes combined with epigenetic factors. I would tell parents that they should still continue to raise their child as they would and see what their child can do and likes and nurture that, because all talent needs is a little nurturing.
Personally, I think this article shows how the rush and competition for scientific advancement in genetic testing does not always yield useful results. I do think genetics influence ones athletic ability; as the article states, “as much as 50 percent of muscle strength is determined by genetic factors.” However, I think nurture and ones environment determines the development of that athletic ability and I think that is what makes the difference between athletic people and athletes. As others have said in their comments, genes can’t predict the level of effort or the time commitment one will make for their sport.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I think having this test done on a child could lead to unethical parenting choices, where parents may be too controlling or put too much pressure on their child to play a certain sport. Part of healthy development is making your own choices and finding what makes you happy, and that may be taken away from kids that feel a responsibility to dedicate themselves to a particular activity because of the results of a genetic test.
If I were to comment under this article, I would caution parents to not get this test. As the article states, its not certain, and even so it is difficult to quantify athletic ability anyway. Parents should encourage children to try all different sorts of activities, and if they find they naturally excel at one they like than that’s great, but I don’t think they should have certain ones forced upon them.
Upon first reading the article I thought it was intelligent of the company to state that the results of the test were not definite and could play a role in a child’s potential academic ability. However, I then thought about how harmful this test may be for a child whose parents may have alternative motives. Some parents may make their child join sports team from a young age in the hopes of benefitting from their fame in the future putting a lot of unnecessary pressure on the child. Parents who aren’t genetically savvy should be informed that this one gene is not the end all and be all when it comes to athletic ability. As the article stated there are over 200 genes that may be positively associated with athletic ability whose impact needs to be further studied. Parents need to understand that athletic ability isn’t also completely about genes and the environment has a role to play also.
ReplyDeleteMy initial reaction to this article was that I wonder how much genes really matter if the individual doesn't have a desire to play sports. Even if this test is accurate (which I'm still doubtful of), how much will genes influence their performance if they have no motivation to play the sport that they are supposedly "designed" to play? I think this could become a real issue in creating identity confusion among children who are told from a very young age that they are "supposed" to become a track athlete, or a soccer player, or an endurance athlete, etc. Parents naturally want their children to succeed in life, but how far will they go to see them succeed once they have scientific "evidence" that their child wil excel in a specific sport? I imagine kids being forced to exercise and compete in sports that they hate, and are miserable because of it. We already see this in some way today, with parents who were good at a certain sport and pressure or force their child into playing the same sport because they believe it's "in the family" to play well at that sport. I can only imagine how much more intense this would become if actual scientific evidence was involved.
ReplyDeleteAnother reaction I had to this article was that it doesn't really address any other factors that may come into play in the genetics that supposedly determine athletic ability. I was especially skeptical of this because of how young the children have to be when they get the test. What about epigenetic factors that may change these genes later on in life? At 9 years old a child may not have had much exposure to environmental or lifestyle factors that can alter genes. Later on in life, when some might assume that they'd be in their prime for athletic ability, epigenetic factors may have altered this so called athletic gene. How can we trust the results of something that was tested when the kids were so young, when typically superstar athletes are in their 20s or 30s?
One last thought that I had was whether any counseling was offered with the test results. Although customers might not think results of an athletic test could be devastating, it might impact the dynamic of the family if the results are not what was expected. Imagine a long line of football players who all excelled in the sport, and a father wanting to see if his son will carry on the legacy. Only the son tests oppositely, and is destined to never be good at football. This might have great impacts on the family relationship, or even just create tensions that would otherwise have not been brought up. It is important that counseling be addressed in order to have people react appropriately to the results.
My initial reaction is very similar to that of my classmate, Moses Tran. Moses states that when he thinks of genetics, he thinks "of the interaction of multiple genes and epigenetic factors to create a result, whereas this test only looks at variants of the ACTN3 gene" I would agree with him in the notion that there are many variables that need to be taken into account when considering how a specific gene will be portrayed. After reading the article and doing some research on the side, it is clear to me that there is simply a correlation between presence of the muscle protein alpha-actinin-3 and elite-level athletics. It is important for people to understand that having the specific muscle protein is not a factor of causation leading to elite level athleticism.
ReplyDeleteIt is also important to not that DTC tests are a simple, inexpensive, and inconclusive way to obtain genetic information. Without the help of a genetic counselor or doctor, the results are difficult to fully comprehend and may lead to false associations. I am happy to see that the company’s president spoke of the testing as "a tool not the tool”. Parents who do not understand what the tests truly mean may use the test in a way that could negatively affect their child. They may have a harder time understanding why their child is not excelling in a sport in which the testing predicted they would, placing unnecessary psychological pain or pressure on a child. This type of inconclusive genetic test could lead to the possibility of genetic discrimination in sports, which would entirely change the way athletics influence the world economy.
According to the article, the testing can be used to specify which types of sports a given child would excel in. Though the test claims to provide useful information that could help child find a sport in which will succeed in, I do not support it. If I were to comment on the article, I would ask parents who are considering having their child tested to think about what they want their children to gain from participating in youth athletics. I believe that sports, especially at a young age should be about learning social skills with peers and gaining the benefits of exercise. Sports can also be used as a way for children to understand their bodies, though balance and hand-eye coordination. I would ask parents to reassess the true reason why they want to have their child tested, and research more about DTC testing and inconclusive results before having the testing done.
Contrary to some of the students above, I find it hard to pick a side on this debate of Atlas Sports Genetics offering a DTC test to measure the sport-related fitness of children. Part of me is actually happy to see this type of research being conducted. The human genome is so complex, and they are simply attempting to understand genes and their potential. Who knows, this information on genes and athletic ability could prove useful one day in the future. I think that Gina Mucciardi’s post said it best, “Parents want nothing more for their children than to succeed, and especially in the United States where athletic competition may often be prided more than athletic achievement... And hey, $149 is not too bad, it's a "genetic test" - very high tech.” Instead of children becoming discouraged when they are not all that great at a sport, they can determine which ones may be better suited for their genetic and athletic abilities. Finding that one sport at a younger age, which they can excel at, could potentially set them up for opportunities down the road, for example college scholarships. For parents who aren’t as genetically savvy as Genomics students are, they could not understand the results given, or take these results as the “final word” about their child’s abilities. In Leighton’s study, published in Public Health Genomics (2012), their findings implied that the general public has the potential to misinterpret DTC results without appropriate assistance. I completely agree with these conclusions, and consumers must remember what the company’s president, Kevin Reilly, told ScientificAmerican.com: “This is a tool, not the tool.”
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, I have an issue with there already being a direct-to-consumer test on the matter. There is a reason why Atlas Genetics screen is the only one commercially available in the U.S. that tests for fitness-related genes. There is still so much that is unknown about the topic, requiring ample research in the future. Stephen Roth, an assistant professor at the University of Maryland in College Park, said how “There are 200 genes we are cataloging as having some positive association with fitness-related performance… and there are 20,000 genes in the genome, so we're scratching the surface in relation to those studied.” Sports performance is so complex, and as more genes are studied, the literature becomes messier. This also may explain why even the results of this test by Atlas Sports Genetics are broad; all three results, according to which X and R variants a child has from both parents, are related to endurance sports. Considering most sports require some amount of endurance, I would not find these results to be very helpful. Furthermore, this article states “The results do tell you whether you have this protein in your muscle. That is clear. We have no idea if it contributes to performing at anything but an elite level.”
Taking a minute to examine the website more closely, there were various “red flags” that came to my attention. Not only are there multiple spelling/grammatical errors on the website, but there are also many nuances within their Privacy Policy that concern me. For example, they keep using the term/phrase “third party partners,” explaining how they will have access to certain information. It is unclear, however, who these “third party partners” are specifically; this makes both myself, and I would hope their customers, very nervous. In addition, I found it interesting how the website addressed what would happen if the company were to buy other assets or sell to another company. This relates back to a Blog Post we completed a few weeks ago: Who should have access to a person’s genetic information stored by private companies? Atlas Sports Genetics states that, “In such transactions, information about customers often is among the transferred assets.” Though only one line in the lengthy policy, this should still be of importance to consumers and their privacy.
http://www.karger.com/Article/FullText/327159
http://www.karger.com/Article/Pdf/327159
I agree with many of my classmates in their initial reactions to this article. As stated by my classmate William Gresser, "the technology is quite interesting, and the fact that they only need a saliva sample to determine how the gene will react is quite remarkable," however, I think it extremely unnecessary and solely a way for Atlas Sports Genetics to make money. This test for the variants of the ACTN3 gene in children under 9 years of age only confirms what is wrong with our society concerning the need to compete, be perfect, and be the best at what we do.
ReplyDeleteConcerning the results of the ACTN3 gene test, the article states that they "have no idea if it contributes to performing at anything but an elite level. Even there, there are contradictions." This being the case, I see this genetic test as a disturbing way for parents to be overly controlling and invasive in their children's lives. The only thing to come from knowing the results of the ACTN3 gene is for parents to force a particular sport on their children which they may not enjoy, or kill their dreams and possibilities of succeeding in a particular sport. There is much more that goes into excelling in a sport including determination, environmental factors, family support, and team spirit and motivation. Being involved in sports at a young ago also does a lot for the building of one's character and shouldn't be based solely around success and winning. I would encourage parents to not have their children tested for the ACTN3 gene, and instead allow their child to explore many sports and extracurricular activities to see what best fits them. This allows children to learn for themselves what they enjoy and what they are good at, and ultimately involves ALL of the factors affecting a child's development, talents, and capabilities.
I wanted to reconsider my previous post, so here is my new post:
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this article, I believe that parents might take advantage of the genetic test mentioned in this article. If a parents discovers that their child has a variant of the ACTN3 gene, they might push their child to play sports at an early age. I find this to be somewhat true today with increasing popularity of sports. There are many opportunities for student athletes to find their way to prestigious colleges. Beginning sports at an early age as well as being talented in those sports gives these athletes an advantage over “ordinary” athletes. Parents might be too aggressive or forceful in getting their child to participate in athletics if they find that their child has this gene. Parents might approach this genetic test for the wrong reasons and automatically assume that their child is going to be an amazing athlete if they have this gene, placing too much pressure on the child.
It is not essential for parents to know if their child has a gene for a muscle protein that could enhance their athletic performance. I agree with my classmate, Morgan Minogue’s statement that “people must understand that having the specific muscle protein is not a factor of causation leading to elite level athleticism.” The test is nothing more than an indication of the potential for superior athletic performance. If parents do not receive genetic counseling after receiving the results of the test, they could misinterpret the results and assume that their child will be an elite athlete. Excelling in athletic performance takes more than a test that verifies the possession of a given gene; it calls for practice, dedication, and effort on the part of the athlete. I think that children who want to play sports and are dedicated athletes will excel in their sport regardless of whether or not he or she possesses the gene. In other words, epigenetic factors play a role in athleticism; it is not solely determined by nature.
The most impressive thing about this article was how the president, Kevin Reilly, explained the test. He describes the test as one that may indicate what sports may or may not work for your child. He makes no statement about how this test could tell you what your child will be good at or if your child will be an Olympian. There was no false advertising on his part. He explained the test for what it was and even gave background into the past literature on research done in that field. He almost appears to downplay what the test can do. It seems that in our society there are many ways that different companies could take advantage of consumer ignorance and make large profits off it by not telling the whole story or being vague about the procedures or what the test really tells you. Rielly puts everything in the open for anyone to read in this article, makes no guarantees and explains the test so anyone can understand.
ReplyDeleteOn another note I believe that there really is no "athletic" genes. I believe that these researchers have found these genes that are common in athletes that make protein, but it's not the genes that indicates if someone will be an athlete. Anyone with these "athletic" genes can choose not to do athletics. We created athletics, we did not "create" genes to excel at them. My parents were not athletes at all and I am a D1 athlete. These genes were probably around in ages before our time, I think the fact we can have recreational activities and athletics in our society makes us look for reasons that some people are better than others. We find these genes in athletes but we may have found them in medieval times in black smiths. There may be some genetic relevance in families that have histories of athletes that perform at the top levels of sports but I feel we are just searching for reasons to make money.
I think this is an interesting discovery, but I also think it is more of a good business idea than a genetic breakthrough. Many parents would do anything for their kids to be superstar athletes. The pressure that children face is enough without having to worry about living up to their "genetic potential". Sure it might be a fun fact to know if you have these athletic genes, but there are more factors than genes that result in athletic performance. For example, children might be at greater risk of being forced into a sport or athletic event that they don't even like due to parents expectations. As I mention in a previous post, I don't think everything is 100% nature, but a combination of nature vs nurture so athletic greatness must be cultivated delicately. I've seen many children put into a sport program at an early age, but then they get "burnt out" before they even reach middle school resulting in a hatred for the sport. I'm really just not a fan of this genetic test and I feel there are more disadvantages psychologically to children than there are benefits. I'm not saying that athleticism has a nothing to do with genetics, because I feel that there is a strong correlation between the two. I just don't like the idea of the potential parenting that may result from knowing.
ReplyDeletehttp://sportsmedicine.about.com/od/anatomyandphysiology/a/genetics.htm
As an athlete myself, I was not surprised that there are genetic tests for athletic ability. Throughout high school, several people talked about how some people have muscles that are better for sprinting and others had muscles that performed better in endurance activities. And while I do believe that to be competing at an Olympic level there needs to be some natural talent (i.e. genetic pre-disposition), I don't think that it is necessary to excel at the sport. For sports, hard work and dedication are far more important than any natural ability. Regardless of the results of this genetic test, I think that any child can excel at anything if he/she spends enough time and effort practicing. Perhaps without the genetic advantage, the child will not be the best player in the league, but the child can certainly still be an excellent player.
ReplyDeleteSince this test is DTC, many parents may not understand that these genes are not the only indicators of athletic ability. Parents may also assume that the results of the test are the end all be all for their child's sports career. It would be important to inform parents that the tests do not tell them whether or not their kid will be the next Olympic champion or a professional athlete. Like many of my classmates mentioned, some parents may apply too much pressure on their child to be the best athlete, or may push them into a sport that they do not like. This sets parents up for disappointment in their children when their sports dreams don't come true.
However, I do think that this test can have some benefits. Almost every child plays a sport when they are younger. It is an important social activity and makes life easier for the kid during gym class. If these tests can point parents in the direction of the sport that the child will do most well in, and then most likely will enjoy the most, it could help the child make friends and connections.
I don't think that this test is necessary for children. This test only gives a slight indication on genetic athletic ability, and there are many more genes and environmental factors that contribute to a person's athletic ability. It is also important for parents to remember that most kids will play sports for fun and will not pursue an athletic career. So, for kids, being the best at a sport is not important, and extra pressure from parents can ruin the experience for the child.
This article is very interesting and the first thing I thought about was natural selection and Darwinism: survival of the fittest. This type of evolution is completely different from the idea it was years ago. We are now able to genetically modify many parts of human genome as well as recognize certain traits within our own genes. This article states that for a mere $149 parents can find out whether their child carries a certain gene that increases their ability in certain sports. I asked myself this question in order to recognize my feelings on the matter: If I had a son would I want to know which sport he would best excel at and then encourage him to play or run that sport to become the ultimate athlete? The answer I came up with was, no. Although I would love if my son became the next Christiano Ronaldo I also believe that sports as a child are more than learning about competition and effort, but rather about sportsmanship and teamwork. Think about when this company is checking the gene, at age 9. It seems unreasonable to push such a behavior model on a child, but rather to encourage them to work towards their own decisions and to develop motor skills. This isn't the same type of natural selection as it was in the past, but rather walking on the fine lines of an ethical dilemma because we might only be hurting our children's free will.
ReplyDeleteWhen first reading the article, my initial reaction is too completely argue against this product based off of what we have learned so thoroughly in our Genomics class. For a product to claim that they can practically tell you what if your child has what it takes to achieve in a certain field such as sports is brings up numerous problems for a child. There is a lot more to the development of a child aside from their genes, with their environment being the most important one. Whether a child tests for a particular gene or not does not mean they will not have a successful sports filled life, and vice versa. Do we want to introduce such pressures onto a child at such a young age, pushing them towards a career based on their genetics rather their personal interest? It seems detrimental, also do we want to make children in general feel they cannot obtain certain goals if this test becomes the norm? Are we created a standard of regular people vs. extraordinary people? This separation based on Eugenetics always make me feel wary because as we know history has a pattern of trying to separate people into higher and sub-level classes (WWII and the Holocaust, slavery) and this is in many cases is based off of “science.” We have to be careful of “science” or “research that further separates us.
ReplyDeleteAgain it is easy to find the extreme faults with this procedure, however stepping back and taking a more objective view on the subject, I think that their might be some validity in what Direct to Consumer products want to provide. For example, if a teacher notices a child in class seems to be very good at drawing. The child is indifferent to it, and only draws on occasions in which it is assigned. If the teacher felt inclined to suggest that the parent enrolls said student into more drawing classes to tailor their talent would that be wrong? In this case where the teacher would represent DTC would we tell the teacher..”Its wrong to do that because you make other kids feel a certain way.,” or “It's wrong to do that because you are putting too much pressure on the child.” Instead of demonizing DTC companies we need to explain to parents and others that come across information such as this to take it with a “grain of salt.” Genetic testing, like a teacher can pick up trends and would be perfections however that doesn't mean your child is Picasso. DTC companies also need to alter the promises they make, but this would be unrealistic because then they would not be able to sell their products.
I found this article, as well as the idea for this particular test, quite interesting. Mostly because my hometown was home to both the 1932 and 1980 Winter Olympics and we usually send about 20 people to each Winter Olympics. So not only did this interest me on the screening level, but also it makes me think about the possible epigenetics associated with it (so many Olympians coming from one place.
ReplyDeleteHowever I do not believe this screening test is necessary, especially for children as young as the age of 9. Growing up, sports were a huge part of my life and I'm sure it was that way with may others as well. I can't really imagine my life without them. But I feel that the "fun" in sports could quickly be removed if this test is used in the wrong way.
I think this article can show how much we can do by studying the human genome. Genomics can be very helpful in showing predispositions toward not only diseases but it’s also really interesting that we can attempt to predict what sorts of activities people could excel at. This article explores the possibility of predicting a child’s ability to make a certain protein and therefore what sport they would be good at. From here, could research labs and companies predict a person’s artistic or musical abilities as well? I think the genetic aspect of our skills is very intriguing. However I am a strong believer in that even if we are predisposed to being good or not good at something, we can turn that around and prove our genes wrong through hard work and determination. Even if a child has certain copies of a gene like ACTN-3, they can build muscle through repetitive workouts and pushing themselves past what they believed to be their limits. Having the genotype that codes to make the alfa-actinin-3 protein may put you at a slight advantage than those who don’t but that doesn’t mean that those who don’t have that protein in their muscles will be worse.
ReplyDeleteAll my life I’ve seen athletes that have natural talent and waste it by not trying and assuming their natural talent will just take them to the top. I have seen time after time that this fails them. As you get to the higher levels of sports, more and more of your competitors are amazing natural athletes who also worked their hardest to keep getting better or faster. While I think this is a really interesting find, I think there has to be more research into the ACTN-3 gene and the alfa-actinin-3 protein. Whether it’s absence will prevent you from reaching the top of your sport needs to be confirmed and if so, this test will be much more applicable. As the CEO said, “this test is just a tool to select what MAY be the best sport for you or your child.” What parents need to understand is that this test can show what sports your child might be able to naturally excel at but it doesn’t mean that they WILL reach elite levels. The parents that are having their under 9-year old child tested for this are definitely the types of parents who are trying to live vicariously through their children and using every possible idea to have their child succeed. This may cast very high expectations and extreme pressures on the child. Chances are if the parent is testing their child this early then they will focus all their energy and all their child’s time into training this one sport and then the child will be burned out much earlier than other athletes experience. It is a cool idea to tell parents where their children can potentially do very well but I think they need to take it with a grain of salt and be very careful with how they use the information given to them.
My first reaction to this article is : Oh, great. Yet another product or service that is scamming well-meaning parents, who know nothing about genetics, into purchasing something that will either crush their hopes or give them false ones. Parents tend to want what is best for their children, and many pour time and money into sports activities for them. Even though the president of the company is saying that parents should not rely on the test as a set determining factor, it will still be heavily thought of as such.
ReplyDeleteThis product also takes away from the idea of skill that is in sports. Unless it is a sport that purely tests ones strength/endurance, there is a lot more that goes into being an athlete than how well engineered the muscles are for the actual work of the sport. It ignores the tact, the quick thinking, the motivation, etc. that is required. I believe that if the company is only connecting the muscles to sport performance, this could affect how some parents see what sports are all about and even how they will push their children to excel. I can even see parents pushing their children to get stronger or work harder for the sport "best suitable" for them because it is "in their genes". Who knows, this pressure could lead to steroid use.
This could also produce guilt in parents if they feel that their child may not be able to do a certain sport because of the genes that they past down to their child. They may feel that they have prevented their child from being able to succeed on account of their own biology.
If I were to comment, I would say that this test is not worth the $149. Those reading this and thinking about seriously getting it should not spend that much money on a test that will maybe perhaps suggest that their child could be capable of playing certain sports better than some could be - on account of variants of a gene associated with a certain protein.
I feel like there's not a huge difference if the parents were to find out the results when the child is 9 years old or 15 years old. Like the article said, this test is only a tool used to utilize their child's athletic ability. However, if the child is not motivated, then it doesn't matter if they have the gene or not. When children are aged 9, most of their decisions are made by their parents: what sports to sign them up for, what instrument to play, what activities/skills to learn. While the child may grow to like the sport, I think the motivation and test results would benefit the child more when they are older, regardless of their sport. The article also stated that the difference in performance is only significant in elite and highly competitive situations, so the differences in performance at any lower level would be marginal.
ReplyDeleteAs is the danger with any DTC test, the possibility of parents misinterpreting the data and basing decisions off of misguided conclusions is always going to be present. Manufacturers run the risk of angry consumers, claiming their test did not produce the outcomes promised. If parents are really considering using this test for their children, I would caution them in their use of the test results.