Changing Trends in Non-Communicable Diseases: Implications in Global Health

First I would like to say that I really enjoyed the "Pharmacogenomics in Admixed Populations" presentation by Andrea.

I am personally fascinated by this topic. I am looking forward to the development and the utilization of this technology and the numerous interesting and controversial debates that are bound to rise from genetic information gathering.

I believe the technology is becoming more and more pertinent and applicable to the population of today and the future. The population of the United States and slowly the rest of the world is becoming mixed. I know in my family I have "happa" cousins (half Asian and half Caucasian).

With the many 1 mix, 2 mix, 3 mix, and so on, people out there, pharmacogenomics will definitely be more beneficial and with the trend of our nation and slowly the other nations, mixes will definitely become more and more common and even possibly the majority in some cases.

Pharmacogenomics are also beneficial to non-mixed populations. Looks can be deceiving. Just because you may look "white" and check the "white" box, your genetics may be different. Just because you look more "white" and consider yourself "white" when you are in fact "happa", your genetics may actually be more similar to your "other half" than the half you associate with the most.

To reassure the public and protect misuse of information, laws and regulations should definitely be put in place first.

In regards to equitable sharing of benefits of genomics, I feel regulations will prevent costs to be driven up and only accessible by those who are able to afford it.

In regards to ethics of genetic testing, I believe this will be a highly debated topic. Because ethics whether professional or moral are quite vague and subjective to individuals, ethics of genetic testing will not differ in subjectivity. Because of this subjectivity, misuse of genetic information is likely to occur. Those with high ethics, professional or moral, will refrain from misusing genetic information and will inform patients of potential irregular findings. Those with low ethics, professional or moral, will likely misuse genetic information and do not feel a moral duty to inform patients of potential irregular findings.

Personally I believe pharmacogenomics is where we are headed and if we can brainstorm possible problems we may face in the future, we are able to put interventions, regulations, and laws to prevent the proposed problems from rising. Through a cost to benefit analysis, the pharmacogenomic technology has more benefits than costs after regulations and laws are put in place to prevent predicted problems.

Before working with big pharma this summer, I never knew nor heard of pharmacogenomics. I am glad Andrea shared this with our class because pharmacogenomic technology is definitely future focused and innovative.

The question that was asked repeatedly by the subjects I worked with in my big pharma clinical trials was "Do I have the fat gene?" I know there are clinical trials to determine if there is a gene linked to obesity, but is that really the solution? Should we just identify the fat gene and zap it or should we raise awareness and empower individuals to take responsibility for their own health through changes in lifestyle (exercise) and nutrition (diet)?

For our instant gratification population, identifying the fat gene and zapping it may be the most appealing and marketable for businessmakers, it is our job as global health leaders to prevent this "treating the disease" mentality and promoting the "prevention through lifestyle and nutrition changes" mentality.