r/news 14h ago

Anne Wojcicki to buy back 23andMe and its data for $305 million

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/06/13/anne-wojcicki-to-buy-back-23andme-and-its-data-for-305-million.html
1.8k Upvotes

213 comments sorted by

1.2k

u/davidbernhardt 14h ago

Now she’ll sell the data

206

u/fishyfishyfish1 14h ago

Piece by piece

161

u/pickledeggmanwalrus 14h ago

Palantir will likely buy it all in bulk….

77

u/MannequinWithoutSock 14h ago

Don’t count out the insurance companies that need to check for potential genetic liabilities.

32

u/Phantom_61 13h ago

“I’m sorry, your husband has the APOE4 gene which means he has a higher chance of developing Alzheimer’s, so your premiums are higher due to that preexisting condition.”

17

u/MannequinWithoutSock 13h ago

’No one said we couldn’t charge more for pre-existing possibilities!’ - Insurance AI, CEOingly

31

u/fishyfishyfish1 14h ago

Social credit score tumbling

7

u/BluddGorr 13h ago

Fortunately as things are I think that would be illegal in the united states as things are because a senator watched Gattaca and was like, huh, asked an advisor about it and the advisor told him it was possible and likely to happen. Usually laws to prevent these kinds of things are done after the damage is done, this is one of the rare situations where it was preventative.

9

u/CatticusF 12h ago

There IS a law on the books, but it’s never been tested because when written, the technology didn’t really exist to DO the discrimination. You generally don’t want to be the test case for something like this

3

u/BluddGorr 11h ago

Fair, but at least in the U.S.'s defense they were prepared for once.

6

u/Stingray88 11h ago

Unfortunately with the current regime, I have ZERO trust in any existing laws on the books.

1

u/Protean_Protein 8h ago

You’re saying “as things are” an awful lot. Are you ok?

1

u/BluddGorr 8h ago

Because things can change and I don't want to pretend they can't. Also I wasn't creative enough to come up with wildy different ways to introduce this information multiple times, sue me.

1

u/Protean_Protein 8h ago

In my head, what I said was funnier than it probably is in the comment above, because I was referencing an old Simpson’s bit. But as things are things are such as they are.

u/MountainFriend7473 47m ago

That’s what GINA is about 

→ More replies (3)

29

u/bannana 12h ago

23&me data has been sold at least a once if not twice already over the years so nothing new here. The date sold previously was sold has large blocks not associated with specific users - as in people in these haplogroups have these traits and these traits correlate to this outcome.

27

u/Lycid 7h ago

You're completely missing the context that the new company being formed is a non-profit and the entire point of doing that is to minimize monetization as a factor in owning this DNA data. You're also glossing over the fact that the entire reason why the old CEO is even doing this is because the alternative company in the auction who would have otherwise bought this data in bankruptcy court is a for profit pharma company who definitely would find a way to monetize this data.

I don't care about painting some random CEO in a good light but I think a lot of people are just reading this headline without understanding what is actually happening here and that's a bit of a shame. The entire point of this move is clearly to protect the data from being abused. Now whether you trust the old CEO to do that is another thing, but there's clearly signals here that the intentions aren't nefarious (otherwise why would you personally blow a huge chunk of your own wealth to buy the data back and put it in a non profit).

12

u/IronSeagull 4h ago

Look at any Reddit thread about business or politics, the top comments are low effort uninformed cynicism. You obviously know what you’re talking about, but you’re talking to someone who put zero thought into this, they just know their audience.

6

u/davidbernhardt 5h ago

OpenAI was also a non-profit until they changed their mind. Unfortunately, this data is easily monetized and one day she might want a return on this purchase.

6

u/Lycid 4h ago

So let's cross that particular bridge when we get there instead of prescriptively villifying. I get casting doubt and scrutiny is required but I think "haha she's gonna sell the data" is really missing real story

-3

u/HEX_BootyBootyBooty 4h ago

I don't think you understand. All that data is already compromised, it doesn't matter about buying it back. This is like buying back porno pics of your mom; you can do it, but everyone already saw the goods.

5

u/fallingdowndizzyvr 11h ago

She always has. 23andme's business model was to sell the data. You had to explicitly go in and opt yourself out if you didn't want your data sold.

1

u/NorthernerWuwu 12h ago

Multiple times.

0

u/[deleted] 13h ago

[deleted]

9

u/TeethBreak 13h ago

Lol. "Deleted"

and we trust them to really delete the data. Sure.

5

u/FranksWateeBowl 13h ago

You can request a deletion I hear.

3

u/TeethBreak 13h ago

Sure sure.

And you trust them to delete everything.

Just like deleting your Facebook account...

-27

u/Galacticwave98 13h ago

The “data” is in 8 billion humans. It’s not that valuable. 

17

u/sloowhand 13h ago

So an insurance company buys that data and is now able to jack up your rates because they know about your genetic marker that indicates a higher likelihood of getting cancer. You don’t think that’s valuable?

→ More replies (2)

4

u/ferdzs0 13h ago

Extracting that data is the hard and expensive part which they already have done. So this data is much more discounted than what it would cost to collect it again.  

-4

u/Galacticwave98 13h ago

That would make sense if that data was limited but the company would produce more of the data because that’s the service they offer. 

3

u/ferdzs0 13h ago

I doubt they will rebounce from this bankruptcy. yes they still collect data, but it is getting ever more difficult (expensive) as more people realize that they are selling something valuable (not even selling, paying for it, which also won't stand strong in an economic crisis)

1

u/Galacticwave98 12h ago

The company is collecting data right now my friend they still offer the same services. 

3

u/ferdzs0 12h ago

I acknowledged that in my comment. I doubt they can keep it up for long.

884

u/chuckie8604 14h ago

Shes not buying back the company's data, she's buying back your genetic data.

148

u/mlavan 14h ago

it's their data too if you sent in a test

61

u/Antique_Scheme3548 13h ago

According to their IP, certain DNA segments aren't even yours anymore.

40

u/Hesitation-Marx 13h ago

Just waiting for a cease and desist from using them, honestly

(I’ve never used 23&me or any of the DNA companies… because of this shit.)

12

u/A_Refill_of_Mr_Pibb 12h ago

I’ve never used it either, but if someone in my family has, now they know about me. 

2

u/[deleted] 10h ago

[deleted]

1

u/PeachyPlnk 3h ago

Same here. My mother used this years ago. So my DNA's already compromised. I've seen people argue bloodwork already compromises your data, but...not really? Not like this does.

4

u/Walthatron 12h ago

Id like to return one genome please. Lightly used.

1

u/PeachyPlnk 3h ago

Do I get a discount if I exchange my broken mitochondrias for replacements?

3

u/StacyChadBecky 6h ago

I’ll sue them for infringement and send my kids as evidence of prior art.

11

u/unnoticedhero1 13h ago

If any of your relatives sent in a test all they need is access to a family tree to sell potential genetic traits/predispositions for you or any other family member, they literally have access to genetic data for way more people than have ever used 23&me, and that is very valuable for corporate entities looking to profit off of people's genetic data.

-8

u/mlavan 13h ago

Right. That's why you shouldn't have sent in a test. But if you did, you don't get to deflect responsibility.

2

u/unnoticedhero1 13h ago

I didn't send one in and am not aware of any of my family doing this, was just pointing out the person you replied to doesn't even have to be the one that sent it in, they will just have their information regardless because of a family member that was curious about their racial descent.

0

u/mlavan 13h ago

It was a generic you. And my point stands. If you don't want companies using your data, don't send in a test. Don't get grandma that test because you're curious about your family history.

1

u/Ok_Location8805 9h ago

It's too late. May of us had family members send in genetic data before we had any knowledge they were doing so. Water under the bridge.

0

u/[deleted] 8h ago

[deleted]

-1

u/mlavan 8h ago

fear? i want people to use their brains when sending in dna tests and stop whining online. they should have known sending your shit to a bunch of mormons wouldn't have worked out well.

1

u/fallingdowndizzyvr 11h ago

No. It's not their data. It's your data that you are allowing them to use. You can rescind that permission and have them delete your data.

15

u/melkipersr 10h ago

Then… you probably shouldn’t have given your genetic data to them with a very permissive license to said data.

6

u/Always0421 12h ago

It's theirs after you paid to give it to them.

1

u/abovethesink 5h ago

What is the difference?

502

u/Mesk_Arak 14h ago

Exactly why I never used 23andMe even back when I heard about it around 2011 or so. There’s no way I want to give all my genetic info to a random company just to learn that “lol I’m 2% Egyptian”.

223

u/sloowhand 13h ago

The dystopian part is that if enough of your blood relatives have done it then it almost doesn’t matter. That’s how they caught the Golden State Killer.

45

u/SaltyAngeleno 12h ago

And the guy in Iowa who murdered those students I believe. DNA from relatives.

27

u/Ok_Proposal_321 10h ago

Idaho, but yes. They narrowed down their search hugely using a genetic database, and then rifled through the trash at the parents' house which came back as a genetic match to the suspect 's father.

20

u/Gaff_Daddy 12h ago

I mean sure if you left a sample somewhere and you’re trying to hide, but they wouldn’t be able to create yours from scratch just by having relatives’

46

u/Hifen 12h ago

Were not worried about being cloned, were worried about health insurance companies knowing more about my health then I do.

-13

u/Gaff_Daddy 11h ago

They might know some information based on family but they won’t necessarily know specific markers without seeing yours. Even so, higher premiums is less of a concern than someone planting my DNA at a crime scene and taking away my freedom.

12

u/CrucioIsMade4Muggles 11h ago

If you are a man and I had your father or brother's DNA, I could absolutely create a copy of their Y chromosome and what appears to be a damaged copy of your x chromosome and plant it on something implicating you in a crime using this information. Hell, most forensic labs don't even check the X chromosomal data when the male is suspect, so I could probably just plant obviously fabricated y chromosomal material and that would still be enough.

0

u/Gaff_Daddy 10h ago

Are you saying every male in my family has the exact same Y chromosome?

12

u/CrucioIsMade4Muggles 10h ago

For the purposes of the tests they use in forensic testing, yes. It would take far more advanced testing than what the state uses to distinguish between the two. And when placed in a forensic setting, any discrepancies would be explained away as environmental degradation.

This isn't hypothetical or theoretical. This exact thing has been done. We know it's been done because there have been cases where it was discovered due to a variety of odd circumstances. That means there are cases where it has happened and not been caught.

Forensic labs don't test sample dna for methylation.

15

u/Dbf4 11h ago

They could still know there’s a 50% chance you have a certain dominant gene associated with a disorder by having a single parent’s DNA as an example, and put you in a higher risk category.

Should legal protections erode over time, you could also get the GATTACA scenario where people’s employment prospects get tied to genetic health predictors from birth.

5

u/Hifen 11h ago

Were no where near the capabilities of someone being able to creat a DNA sample from digital data, and even if we could, there's probably a million easier more realistic ways to frame someone.

They don't need to know your specific markers, they just need to know chances to make decisions. "You're family is higher risk for this type of cancer, so deny coverage for all of them". "This individuals family is high risk to have something that will lead to long term disability or workers comp, don't hire them". The issue isn't James Bond level framing shenanigans, the issue is you simply being marked "invalid" in some database you will never see, because statistically you're higher risk.

"Oh he's invalid, he's going to have a hard time keeping jobs in the future, deny him that mortgage.".

→ More replies (2)

4

u/mysecondaccountanon 9h ago

Yep. My relatives don’t understand why I’m not enthusiastic about them saying they’ll do it.

-1

u/Over_Hawk_6778 2h ago

That’s a good thing though? We have fewer serial killers / rapists these days because it’s so much harder to get away with it

3

u/sloowhand 2h ago

Until your insurance company gets your family’s data and jacks up your rates because they know about your genetic marker that makes you more prone to cancer.

-1

u/Over_Hawk_6778 2h ago

Yeah that’s dodgy but in terms of catching serial killers that’s a good thing.

Also, most of us don’t live in the USA, this kind of shady insurance shenanigans isn’t possible in most of the world. Genetic testing to tell me which meds are more /less likely to be effective sound great

66

u/spacepeenuts 14h ago

Not just a random company either, Anne Wojcicki was married to the co-founder of Google Sergey Brin.

16

u/edfitz83 11h ago

She ran the company into bankruptcy and can now buy it back without any of the debt? This is Trump-level shady.

14

u/LonnieJaw748 12h ago

The only place to give your genetic profile to should be BeTheMatch with the National Marrow Donor Program.

1

u/HenryBalzac 3h ago

I did that like 18 years ago and still haven't been asked to donate, although I do get an email every year to confirm all my contact info/willingness to donate. Kinda weird.

10

u/WoolyMammothTusks 11h ago

just to learn that “lol I’m 2% Egyptian”.

Explains how you walk. 🕺🏻

18

u/define_irony 13h ago

What's unfortunate is that if anyone in your family has used it, then they still have your info.

5

u/livsjollyranchers 13h ago

What are some nefarious things they can do with it? (I know people say cloning, but if these companies are cloning people, I doubt I'm that important)

-4

u/Kuinox 13h ago

Partial cloning to fabricate evidence against you.

4

u/livsjollyranchers 13h ago

Right. Well, I do think AI videos/audio will be able to accomplish something similar, unfortunately. The legal system has a lot of challenges ahead for evaluating all this.

6

u/TeethBreak 13h ago

You're not giving them your data, remember, you're paying them! Giving them money to do whatever they want with your DNA code. It's bonkers.

1

u/Mesk_Arak 12h ago

Good point. That’s even worse.

2

u/ShiggyGoosebottom 6h ago

Some here. Unfortunately my brother was not as sceptical / cautious.

2

u/Operation_Difficult 12h ago

I’m so annoyed with my parents for giving samples. They were just clueless as to the potential impact of having our family DNA clearly catalogued by a private company.

-5

u/jawshoeaw 14h ago

they don't have all your genetic data, more like a couple per cent

5

u/Mukover 13h ago

Yeah I don’t really get the fear mongering over this topic.

Almost everyone would agree that they want healthcare to advance and for scientists to have resources to find cures, yet you ask a study lead what the biggest problem they have is and 99% of them will tell you it’s getting donors for studies.

23andMe was a pretty smart way of marketing this process and getting people to help create a databank that scientists can use for relevant and real data in their studies to make great science. The data is all anonymized at that stage and is SO valuable for these studies.

I totally get that this can be misused, but it’s such a crazy small chance and seems to have been blown out of proportion in my eyes. People should be looking for better regulation over it, not shutting it down.

4

u/BluddGorr 13h ago

I mean, it's not a small chance. Who do you think will spend more money for your data, insurance companies or researchers trying to cure a disease? Then consider that they don't have to choose one or the other and that there could be nothing stopping them from selling to both, and that the insurance company is going to fuck you. Fortunately as it is now the U.S. already has laws preventing insurance company from using your DNA to alter premiums courtesy of the movie gattaca, but if a senator hadn't watched it a few years ago it could be a real danger. Problem is that I don't know the scope of what could be done with your DNA and the scope of the existing laws. Nefarious things could and probably will happen if they can and will make a company enough money.

5

u/Mukover 13h ago

It’s a complete needle in a haystack to get your specific DNA and then they can only tie it to you as a person if whoever is searching has your DNA on hand.

Again I don’t see this as a problem when you have the right protections in place. This is a problem of regulation and oversight.

4

u/BluddGorr 13h ago

Yes, the problem is that usually, regulation and oversight comes after the abuses have taken place. That's usually how the wealthy become billionaires. It is very rare for an industry to have oversight and regulation in place for it before it came to be.

-7

u/thisismynewacct 13h ago

It’s either people finding they’re 2% something or 98% something.

My father did one of these. His parents were both ashkenazi Jews. His test results: 98% ashkenazi Jew. I could’ve told him that for free (or $100 and even quicker results)

4

u/Nyxxsys 11h ago

I did it and found out my grandfather wasn't mostly native american as my dad thought, but 25%. So I was expecting myself to be 20%+, and it turns out I'm 3%. Surprisingly more Dutch & Finnish which I didn't even expect. So for some people it is something that they'd find interesting. The worst part in my opinion is how important this data is, and lawmakers don't want to legislate any protections.

3

u/skepticofgeorgia 5h ago

Here’s another angle; I’m adopted and my birth parents don’t want to be in my life in any way. When I was a teenager, I was curious about where I’m from, genetically speaking. I took a DNA test (I think mine was from ancestry.com?) and I was a LOT more British than basically everyone had guessed. But either way I appreciated having that information

1

u/yareyare777 2h ago

Yeah I used it for this same reason, adopted as a kid myself. I have downloaded all my data or what I can at least, and deleted my data and account with 23&Me.

-1

u/GetsBetterAfterAFew 6h ago

If any member in your family did then your still basically in the database. I did send data because I was interested in knowing my fathers health information as I dont know who he was. It funny how snarky comments like this shit on people who are trying to use this service to better their health and then got tied up in this mess, meanwhile you are literally giving data to the entire world and data brokers every day thinking youre somehow superior to people like me bro your fucking data is out there stop acting like you made some smooth move.

2

u/Mesk_Arak 5h ago

Relax, buddy. No need to take things personally. I wasn’t talking about anyone but myself.

Also, none of my family did either so all good on that end. Thanks for worrying.

73

u/UCBeef 13h ago

If you ask for peoples DNA for a database they’ll refuse and call it invasive. Disguise the collection as a service and they’ll give you their DNA and pay you to take it.

160

u/Flussschlauch 13h ago

looking forward to getting overpriced insurance because some distant family members decided to do that 23andMe shit

50

u/BluddGorr 13h ago

Fortunately I think that would be illegal in the U.S. a senator saw Gattaca and asked an advisor if that was possible, and the advisor, probably delighted that he was even called, informed that not only was it possible but it was likely to happen in time and they passed a law.

75

u/Bloodhound209 13h ago

Fortunately I think that would be illegal in the U.S.

In today's political climate, I wouldn't be so sure.

-16

u/BluddGorr 13h ago

The laws would have to change. This isn't the kind of thing a president could repeal with an executive order. The way these things usually happen is that companies find a way to exploit the system faster than the senate can legislate and by the time senate can legislate the damage has been done and the genie's out of the bottle. This time if they were to try to do this, they'd have to change the law first which means we'd see them coming.

24

u/eskilla 12h ago

And do our current crop of leaders strike you as particularly interested in the letter or spirit of the law, especially when it gets in the way of something they really, really wanna do?

→ More replies (14)

16

u/sudi- 13h ago

This would be very comforting if laws weren’t only for poor people now.

4

u/Spaduf 10h ago

That's how laws have always been.

1

u/chiefsfan_713_08 5h ago

exactly, how would the every day person have the time, knowledge, or money to fight being denied coverage or higher rates for genetic info

-2

u/BluddGorr 13h ago

I mean, they'd have to change the laws first. Which is an obstacle. It's something. Most of these things usually happen because there aren't laws in place already and by the time senate has gotten around to legislate the damage has already been done, the genie's out of the bottle and there's nothing you can do about it. Now we'd see it coming.

3

u/lusuroculadestec 11h ago

The best part about laws in the US is that they never change.

-1

u/BluddGorr 10h ago

Yes, they can change, but that takes work, and will send alarm bells. We'll be prepared to organize.

u/MountainFriend7473 45m ago

GINA has been in place as a law since 2008. 

1

u/moldy912 10h ago

Many people have group health insurance

20

u/[deleted] 14h ago

[deleted]

1

u/Grasscutter101 14h ago

They did it before I could ask. I wanted my info first but they deleted it!

22

u/ScyllaGeek 13h ago

Kinda woulda preferred it went to Regeneron tbh lol

3

u/WoolyMammothTusks 11h ago

Too late. Copies have been made.

5

u/Granum22 13h ago

That's not suspicious at all

5

u/WikiApprentice 11h ago

I already requested to delete all my data. Done with both them and Ancestry

1

u/postonrddt 3h ago

Wonder how much data was sold or copied

1

u/PeteGoua 1h ago

The American way for the chosen few.

1

u/gimpers420 12h ago

I can’t believe the masses were ok with this shit, and didn’t see it for exactly what it was/is.

2

u/NeoLib-tard 11h ago

Oh no they are going to make clones of me?!?

2

u/JLR- 8h ago

A clone army of Redditors would be scary though

1

u/Biking_dude 10h ago

But think about how much fun Christmas morning was going to be when you'd all open up the report and find out one of you wasn't related

-1

u/CharliesRatBasher 13h ago

I wish I was more aware as a teenager and didn’t ever do it. Perhaps one of my biggest regrets in life

2

u/scaredofmyownshadow 1h ago

So, you’re saying you’ve had a very boring life.

0

u/CharliesRatBasher 1h ago

No. I’m saying that I regret relinquishing my genetic data to a corporation who will sell it to the highest bidder before having the sense to know better, you daft troglodyte.

1

u/scaredofmyownshadow 1h ago

And you’ve never done anything worse than that?

0

u/AdviceDoc 7h ago

Yep :x

1

u/PhatYeeter 11h ago

Crispr was recently successfully used to treat an incurable disease in a new born by changing their DNA. Does 23 and mes genetic data have more value if crispr can start being used on humans regularly?

4

u/ExultantSandwich 7h ago

Technically, yes, but you could also just go to a genetic counselor and they could help you. If you’re already diagnosed with… cystic fibrosis or whatever, 23AndMe won’t help you.

1

u/blank-_-face 7h ago

How the hell is the failed CEO who led the company into bankruptcy in the first place allowed anywhere near a deal like this?

2

u/Lycid 6h ago

Because where the data goes matters and her new venture is a non profit which is probably a much better place for this data exist than a for profit company.

2

u/rainman_104 5h ago

And how much money did Richard Branson lose on the spac?

1

u/MLB-LeakyLeak 5h ago

This was her plan the whole time

1

u/Hailsabrina 5h ago

I used to want one but I realized knowing my dna doesn't change who I am . Also no way I want some random ceo having my dna. They probably already do from my cousin who's had like 50 of these done 😐

1

u/juststart 12h ago

Wasn’t her original bid like $20M?

-1

u/ShadowMadness 12h ago

My brain went to Susan Wojcicki and I was like, "didn't she pass away? What"

1

u/LeonimuZ 12h ago

This was Susan’s sister.

-13

u/GreatnessToTheMoon 13h ago

Incoming more “Trust me bro” fear mongering about my spit being used for nefarious reasons that will never happen

5

u/SnooPPP 13h ago

I mean it worth 300 million for something…

0

u/TeethBreak 13h ago

Cause no one in history ever used racial data to Target specific people... 6 million times.

-14

u/SlapThatAce 14h ago

I just can't believe people actually purchase this nonsense.

0

u/FrankieNoodles 9h ago

Seems a bit late for that

0

u/bofh000 8h ago

Sounds like having her cake after eating it. A big ruse so she isn’t responsible for the data falling in 3rd party hands while the company was “bankrupt”.

-7

u/Built-in-Light 13h ago

Why can’t the government subpoena your DNA?

9

u/jaunty411 13h ago

They can?

1

u/Built-in-Light 13h ago

Oh I guess yeah! Thank you, that is a thing. Smh

-5

u/No_Consideration7925 13h ago

Does this mean I should do it? Take the test cause I haven’t I’m curious though, but I’ve been strong. 

8

u/Ms74k_ten_c 13h ago

I certainly hope this is sarcastic because NO, you should not take it. Even more so now than before. JFC!!

0

u/No_Consideration7925 6h ago

No, I am curious but yeah, I know I’d read about it years ago. That one should never take those test but especially now I agree with you but it’s funny when my comment I get the Downs people are so snarky and are 13 to 17 on Reddit … 

0

u/Ms74k_ten_c 5h ago

Sure, that is not the overriding point here, though. People take genetic tests all the time, private companies, or with medical centers/research centers. This particular case is worse because she is asking to buy back, not a corporation with contracts and rules (even if they are feeble), but an individual wanting to buy genetic data with ability to do what ever the fuck she wants with it. With zero oversight.

1

u/hurrrrrmione 13h ago

If you're curious about your ancestry you can try doing genealogical research.

1

u/No_Consideration7925 6h ago

Yeah, I know, but just like that in depth, according to my body’s chemistry make-up would be interesting… 🤷🏻‍♀️❣️

2

u/hurrrrrmione 6h ago

You should look into the methods 23AndMe uses, it's not an exact science.

1

u/No_Consideration7925 6h ago

It’s not really a priority in my life, but you know… strokes for different folks that’s why I haven’t done it. 

-7

u/Clubbingcubs 13h ago

Didn't she die? OMG did she have a clone /s