LONGECITY

Someone recently expressed to me that they were worried about genotyping having a negative impact on their career because people wouldn't want to hire people with pending ailments which would harm their bottom line by increasing insurance costs or loss of productivity due to illness.

But to my eyes, it's really about responsibility. Do we ignore that we might have health problems and hope for the best? Or do we do something about it and prevent those health problems? If we take care of ourselves, we'll have better careers and stay healthy healthy and productive longer, maybe indefinitely. If we don't, that's when it becomes a problem, whether companies will see it that way or not, and I believe they will see that everyone has some impending ailment, we all age and we all get this stuff. So naturally, it is always the best practice for smart business men to hire those people who actively seek greater health and longevity. Let's face it, staying young, delaying aging, the stuff we do b/c we like it and want it, that makes us as a community valuable. I think I'll be adding my extensive health improvements to my resume and perhaps devoting a section to it.

What does the health and/or genomics section of your resume look like?

GINA means never having to say you're sorry you got genotyped.

Well, most genetic ailments are not curable or even treatable or preventable under the current technology. Most likely even if you know your genotype, there is nothing you can do about it.

Some ailments that have a smaller genetic component (e.g. Type 2 diabetes), you can do something to prevent it to some extent but employers can just look at your weight to know whether you have a higher chance of type 2 diabetes.

Anyway, I believe GINA prevents any companies to access our genetic info without our express approval, so I think your worry is a bit misplaced.

If you're talking to me, I'm not worried at all. Genetics in the workplace imo, is about establishing a better relationship with your employer, not about being denied healthcare coverage or a job b/c you will raise the rates. If we do away with employer sponsored HC, there's no reason this would even be an issue. I want my employer to have my genetic data. I want to be comfortable with my personality and treated and measured according to my personality. ~50-75% (Rs4680 (G;G and/(or) G;A?) of respond well to abrasive management tactic, another 25% (Rs 4680 (A;A) will suffer such a work environment and as an employee, unless you've studied it, you probably won't understand and may even feel guilty and ashamed despite (A:A) having working memory and attention benefits, and if you're trying to be an (G;G), you might suffer a deficit of working memory performance under that stress of trying to be what you're not. It's lost productivity and bad for business. Of course maybe it would be better to start in schools rather than workplaces, but I'd feel freer and more secure knowing my managers and HR representation had a genetic basis for understanding me. Human resources are finite (until they replace most of us with robots that is...) so I'm of the opinion that genetics being used by HR will only lead to improvement. Management will be able to more readily pull out latent potential and productivity will skyrocket... It's amazing how this genomics and the workplace argument has been framed... It only allows abusive and neglectful selection processes. Not to mention, holding (A;A)s to this metric will increase the cost of stress related healthcare. I could give you a list of similar examples, which could reclaim wasted productivity and produce more wholesome etc. workplaces.