Originally Posted by LostDollar
1) Privacy. If an insurance company has information, employers can potentially get it. This would allow employment discrimination based on genetic tests.
2) Genotypes do not always predict the behavior of phenotypes. I think that could be extended to question whether laboratory tests actually reflect the real life behavior of the phenotype.
Just an attempt by the life insurance companies to restrict the utility of; affordability of; and accessibility to; life insurance which the American consumer has enjoyed over the past decades.
Basically an attempt to use connotations of the word "science" as support for financial gain in the life insurance and medical testing industries.
Why are you using the word always
? Of course no model can always predict the behavior of every single person.
The insurance company is only interested in statistical averages. There are exceptions to EVERY rule. But they base their entire business model on statistical trends. If they find a new way to compile data that renders better and more useful statistics, so be it. Just because some people fall outside of those trends means nothing.
It's like the wage gap myth. The left always says "are you saying that women don't want to be successful, or that they don't work as long or as hard as men
?" The answer is yes, on average
, they don't which is why men will always on average earn more. Sure you can find women that earn more than some men, but those women represent a statistical minority.
When speaking about statistics, it's useless and irrelevant to mention individuals who don't fall in line with the statistics. You can't run a business on exceptions to a rule. No business does.