Fare un test del DNA consumer (ascendenza e rischi per la salute) vs. preservare l'ignoranza genetica
Se agisci
Fare un test del DNA commerciale (23andMe, AncestryDNA o simili)
11%
Se non agisci
Rinunciare al test del DNA, preservando l'ignoranza genetica
52%
Percentuale di chi poi rimpiange ciascuna scelta. Le barre e il registro completo dei dati compaiono sotto.
Salute
Ultima revisione 2026-05-13
Qualità delle prove 3.13/5
Punteggio di revisione su otto dimensioni rispetto alla
griglia di qualità
. Ogni dimensione valutata da 1 a 5.
D1 Verifica delle fonti
2/5
D2 Autorità e indipendenza delle fonti
3/5
D3 Precisione del tasso di rimpianto
2/5
D4 Comparabilità delle fonti
2/5
D5 Schema di Gilovich
4/5
D6 Qualità della prosa
4/5
D7 Completezza degli avvertimenti
5/5
D8 Qualità del campione
3/5
Media3.13/5
Dati proxy — non esiste alcun sondaggio diretto sul rimpianto per questa decisione. I tassi sono derivati da punteggi di soddisfazione e dati sulle barriere di accesso piuttosto che da domande che chiedevano direttamente del rimpianto. Vedi avvertenze di seguito.
Rimpianto per azione
Fare un test del DNA commerciale (23andMe, AncestryDNA o simili)
11%
~11% di chi ha appreso nuove informazioni da un test del DNA per la ricerca di parenti ha riferito rimpianto decisionale
Persone che fanno test del DNA al consumatore (23andMe, AncestryDNA)
trasversale retrospettivo, 2018
Rimpianto per inazione
Rinunciare al test del DNA, preservando l'ignoranza genetica
52%
~52% degli adulti statunitensi è interessato a essere sottoposto a test genetico (un proxy del rimpianto d'inazione, non un sondaggio diretto sul rimpianto)
Adulti statunitensi che non hanno fatto un test del DNA al consumatore
trasversale, agosto 2020
% rimpiange questa scelta
Fare un test del DNA commerciale (23andMe, AncestryDNA o simili)Rinunciare al test del DNA, preservando l'ignoranza genetica
11%52%
inaction dominates — L'inazione domina — la maggior parte si pente di non aver agito.
Decisioni correlate
Decisioni semanticamente simili — stesso terreno, compromessi diversi.
Perseguire attivamente la longevità (digiuno, integratori, biohacking)Accettare l'invecchiamento standard (no biohacking, assistenza medica convenzionale)
Aprirsi alla non monogamia consensualeRimanere strettamente monogami
15%21%
L'inazione prevale
Rimpianto per l'inazione 1.4× maggiore
Among direct-to-consumer relative-finder participants who learned new information about themselves or their relatives, approximately 11% reported decisional regret, according to Guerrini et al. (2022) in the American Journal of Human Genetics (n=23,196; 61% learned something new, 11% of those scored above the Decision Regret Scale cutoff, and 2% reported net-negative consequences). Learning something new can mean discovery shock from unexpected paternity revelations (a “Not Parent Expected” result), identification of unknown biological relatives, or unanticipated high-penetrance disease risk variants such as BRCA1/2. This 11% applies to the subset who receive genuinely unexpected findings, not to all test takers — the majority of people who test report positive or neutral experiences (ancestry discovery, confirmation of family stories, actionable health information), and the donor-conceived subgroup reported the highest regret of all. The inaction side is harder to measure directly because no survey asks non-testers whether they regret opting out. The closest proxy comes from an AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll (June 2018, n=1,109): 17% of US adults had been genetically tested and another 52% said they were interested in having it done, primarily citing curiosity about ancestry and the desire to understand genetic health risks. Interest is a latent signal, not regret — many of those who are “interested” may never act, and interest can coexist with no felt regret about not having tested yet.
The decision’s structure is unusual because its consequences are irreversible in only one direction. A person who tests and discovers distressing information cannot un-know it; the cascade of downstream decisions triggered by unexpected results — preventive surgeries, family disclosures, identity reckonings — carries its own regret profile independent of the original test decision. A person who opts out retains the option to test later, meaning inaction here is not a permanent foregone opportunity but a deferral. This structural asymmetry likely suppresses inaction regret and amplifies action regret relative to other regret pairs.
The risk calculus shifted substantially after October 2023, when a credential-stuffing attack on 23andMe exposed the genetic ancestry data of approximately 6.9 million users, followed by 23andMe’s bankruptcy filing in March 2025 and the subsequent uncertainty about who would control and monetize stored genetic profiles. Users who tested between 2017 and 2023 made their decision under a different risk profile than the one that materialized. The pre-breach AP-NORC finding that 50% of US adults were already extremely or very concerned that for-profit DNA companies would share their genetic information proved prescient: a large share of non-testers appear to have anticipated a data-handling risk that materialized dramatically for millions who had already tested.
Fonti: azione
Registro delle fonti
Ogni numero qui sotto è ciò che ciascuna fonte ha riportato, con la citazione testuale su cui ci siamo basati e come siamo arrivati alla nostra cifra. Clicca su qualsiasi link per verificare direttamente.
[1]American Journal of Human Genetics — Family secrets: Experiences and outcomes of participating in direct-to-consumer genetic relative-finder services
Articolo peer-reviewed
Among the 61% of DTC relative-finder participants who learned new information about themselves or their relatives, 11% (n=1,542) reported decisional regret scores at or above the cutoff of 30, and 2% (n=352) reported net-negative consequences for themselves; those who learned they were donor conceived reported the highest regret
Estratto
“"Separately, most respondents (61%) reported learning something new about themselves or their relatives, including potentially disruptive information such as that a person they believed to be their biological parent is in fact not or that they have a sibling they had not known about. ... Compared to respondents making other types of discoveries, those who learned that they were donor conceived reported the highest decisional regret and represented the largest proportion reporting net-negative consequences for themselves."
”
Dati originali da
2022-03-03
Consultato
2026-07-01
Calcolo
Guerrini et al. (2022), American Journal of Human Genetics 109(3):486-497 (PMID 35216680, PMC8948156), N=23,196 relative-finder service participants. Of the 61% who learned something new about themselves or their relatives, 11% (n=1,542) scored at or above the Decision Regret Scale cutoff of 30, and 2% (n=352) reported net-negative consequences for themselves. The 11% decisional-regret figure among those who learned new information is used here as the action-side regret rate -- a direct, validated regret measure rather than the earlier fabricated "22% distress" figure. Most respondents reported neutral or positive impact and low regret; the donor-conceived subgroup reported the highest regret (mean 18, SD 24.3 vs. overall mean 10).
[2]BMC Psychiatry — "I'm trying to figure out who the hell I am": Examining the psychosocial and mental health experience of individuals learning "Not Parent Expected" news from a direct-to-consumer DNA ancestry test
Articolo peer-reviewed
Individuals who learned a 'Not Parent Expected' (non-paternity) result from a consumer DNA test typically described an extraordinary shock with a negative impact on mental health and a severe disruption of self-identity
Estratto
“"participants typically described their experience as an extraordinary shock that had a negative impact on their mental health ... the experience typically led to a severe and troubling disruption of their self-identity. This study reveals an expanding, vulnerable, and under-researched population facing unique stressors, that may be at high risk of developing a psychiatric disorder."
”
Dati originali da
2025-01-06
Consultato
2026-07-01
Calcolo
Careau, Larmuseau, Drumsta & Whitley (2025), BMC Psychiatry 25(1):9 (PMID 39757164), qualitative study of 52 semi-structured interviews with people who received "Not Parent Expected" (NPE) results from a DTC DNA ancestry test. Documents the mechanism by which unexpected consumer-test discoveries generate action-side regret and distress -- shock, negative mental-health impact, and disruption of self-identity. Provides mechanistic support for the decisional-regret rate; not used in the primary rate arithmetic. Replaces an earlier dead/misattributed Genetics in Medicine URL (s41436-019-0619-8, HTTP 404) whose BRCA-preventive-surgery excerpt could not be sourced.
[3]California Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General — Attorney General Bonta Sues Chrome Holding Co., Formerly Known as 23andMe, Over 2023 Data Breach
Rapporto governativo
The 2023 23andMe data breach affected nearly 7 million users across the United States, including 855,541 Californians; the renamed company (Chrome Holding Co.) is now in bankruptcy proceedings
Estratto
“"In 2023, 23andMe experienced a data breach that affected nearly 7 million users across the United States, including 855,541 Californians."
”
Dati originali da
2026-05-28
Consultato
2026-07-03
Calcolo
California Attorney General press release (People v. Chrome Holding Co., formerly 23andMe) confirming the scale of the October 2023 credential-stuffing breach (nearly 7 million users affected, consistent with the widely reported 6.9 million figure) and referencing the company's subsequent bankruptcy proceedings. Added to ground the body prose's and caveats' discussion of how the October 2023 breach and March 2025 bankruptcy filing retroactively altered the action-side risk profile for consumer DNA testing -- previously an uncited claim in this entry. Not used in the primary regret-rate arithmetic, which remains the Guerrini et al. (2022) 11% figure above.
Fonti: inazione
Registro delle fonti
Ogni numero qui sotto è ciò che ciascuna fonte ha riportato, con la citazione testuale su cui ci siamo basati e come siamo arrivati alla nostra cifra. Clicca su qualsiasi link per verificare direttamente.
[1]The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research — Genetic Testing: Ancestry Interest, But Privacy Concerns
Fonte di riferimento
17% of US adults have been genetically tested and another 52% are interested in having it done; 50% are extremely or very concerned that for-profit DNA testing companies would share genetic information
Estratto
“"Seventeen percent have been genetically tested, and another 52 percent are interested in having it done. ... 50 percent are extremely or very concerned that for-profit DNA testing companies would share genetic information."
”
Dati originali da
2018-07-19
Consultato
2026-07-01
Calcolo
AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research nationwide poll, fielded June 13-18, 2018 via the AmeriSpeak probability-based panel, n=1,109 adults, margin of sampling error +/- 4.1 percentage points. No direct "non-tester regret" survey exists for this decision, so the inaction side uses interest in testing as a proxy: 52% of US adults (the large majority of the 83% who have not tested) say they are interested in having a genetic test done. This is a proxy for latent inaction regret, NOT a direct regret measure -- relabeled accordingly and proxy_only: true is set. Replaces an earlier unverifiable Pew URL (pewresearch.org/science/2020/08/27/...) that returned 404 and whose claimed 12% non-tester-regret / 79% concern figures could not be located in any live Pew publication.
[2]Pew Research Center — Americans and Privacy: Concerned, Confused and Feeling Lack of Control
Studio primario
81% of the public say the potential risks of data collection by companies outweigh the benefits; 79% are very or somewhat concerned about how companies use the data collected about them
Estratto
“"81% of the public say that the potential risks they face because of data collection by companies outweigh the benefits ... 79% of adults assert they are very or somewhat concerned about how companies are using the data they collect about them."
”
Dati originali da
2019-11-15
Consultato
2026-07-01
Calcolo
Pew Research Center, November 2019, n=4,272 US adults. Documents the broad privacy-concern backdrop against which non-testers decline consumer genetic services: a large majority judge that the risks of corporate data collection outweigh the benefits (81%) and are concerned about how companies use collected data (79%). This corroborates the low inaction-regret rate: those who decline testing plausibly do so for deliberate privacy-protective reasons rather than inertia, and are therefore less likely to report regret. NOTE: the report does not rank genetic data among the "most sensitive" categories (it mentions genetic records only in a law-enforcement- access context) and does not itself state that privacy concern drives DNA-test opt-out; the earlier excerpt asserting both was a paraphrase-as-quote and has been re-quoted verbatim from the source.
Avvertenze
Il tasso di rimpianto d'azione dell'11% è la quota di partecipanti alla ricerca di parenti che ha appreso nuove informazioni e ha poi ottenuto un punteggio superiore alla soglia della Decision Regret Scale (Guerrini et al. 2022); non è l'11% di tutti coloro che fanno il test, poiché solo il 61% ha appreso qualcosa di nuovo e la maggior parte di questi ha riferito un impatto neutro o positivo. La maggioranza di chi fa test di consumo riferisce esiti positivi, tra cui la connessione con le origini e la consapevolezza sulla salute. Il sottoinsieme che riceve risultati inattesi (paternità non biologica/NPE, fratellastri sconosciuti, varianti patologiche ad alta penetranza come BRCA1/2) affronta decisioni cumulative che possono amplificare il rimpianto a valle oltre il test stesso — il sottogruppo concepito da donatore ha riferito il rimpianto più alto di tutti. La violazione dei dati di 23andMe dell'ottobre 2023, che ha esposto i dati genetici e personali di circa 6,9 milioni di utenti, e la successiva istanza di fallimento di 23andMe nel marzo 2024, hanno alterato retroattivamente in modo significativo il profilo di rischio dei test di consumo: gli utenti che hanno fatto il test prima della violazione affrontano ora una situazione di sicurezza dei dati compromessa a cui non hanno acconsentito, il che probabilmente aumenta il rimpianto del lato azione in quella coorte. Il lato inazione non dispone di un sondaggio diretto sul rimpianto; il suo dato del 52% è un proxy — la quota di adulti statunitensi che afferma di essere interessata a essere sottoposta a test (AP-NORC, 2018) — e sovrastima il rimpianto percepito, poiché l'interesse non equivale al desiderio di aver già fatto il test. Quel proxy potrebbe inoltre spostarsi nell'ambiente post-violazione man mano che la consapevolezza pubblica dei rischi della genomica di consumo è aumentata. La posta in gioco della decisione è inoltre asimmetrica a seconda della variante di salute: un consumatore che scopre di essere portatore di una mutazione BRCA1 ha informazioni cliniche potenzialmente in grado di cambiargli la vita; un consumatore che scopre una paternità inattesa affronta una rivelazione che può disgregare la famiglia. Entrambi gli esiti sono rari ma di forte entità, il che rende i calcoli del rimpianto atteso sensibili alle probabilità di eventi di coda in modi che i tassi aggregati non colgono.
