This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (11) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Parthasarathy, S. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Architectures of Genetic Medicine

Comparing Genetic Testing for Breast Cancer in the USA and the UK

Center for Society and Genetics and Department of Public Policy at the University of California, Los Angeles, shobita{at}ucla.org

This paper compares the development of genetic testing for breast cancer (BRCA testing) in the USA and the UK. It argues that national political cultures played an important role in how these genetic testing technologies were shaped, and that the shapes of these technologies had important implications for the users of these systems. In order to demonstrate the roles of national social and political elements in the development of new genetic testing technologies, I introduce the concept of a technology’s architecture, which is made up of components and the specific ways in which these components are assembled to fulfill particular functions. In the USA, four very different BRCA testing systems initially emerged. However, one biotechnology company, Myriad Genetics, eventually used its legal and economic position to become the sole provider of testing. It offered BRCA testing the way many other laboratory tests were provided in the USA, available to anyone through any physician. The shape of this testing service had important implications for its participants, defining the client as a consumer who could demand access to any of Myriad’s laboratory services, but could not choose among testing systems. In the UK, the government-run National Health Service provided testing through regional genetics clinics, using family history information to assess risks and triage care. Clients in the UK were defined as citizens and patients, who had the right to equal access to the testing system but could not demand any specific services.

Key Words: breast cancer • comparative health care systems • genetic testing • health policy • UK • USA

Social Studies of Science, Vol. 35, No. 1, 5-40 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0306312705047172


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. Abraham and C. Davis Drug evaluation and the permissive principle: continuities and contradictions between standards and practices in antidepressant regulation. Social Studies of Science, August 1, 2009; 39(4): 569 - 598. [Abstract] [PDF]

				E. Popp Berman Why did universities start patenting? Institution-building and the road to the Bayh-Dole Act. Social Studies of Science, December 1, 2008; 38(6): 835 - 871. [Abstract] [PDF]

				I. Lowy and J. P. Gaudilliere Localizing the Global: Testing for Hereditary Risks of Breast Cancer Science Technology Human Values, May 1, 2008; 33(3): 299 - 325. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Hayden Taking as Giving: Bioscience, Exchange, and the Politics of Benefit-sharing Social Studies of Science, October 1, 2007; 37(5): 729 - 758. [Abstract] [PDF]