Google Co-Founder Brin Discloses That He Is Vulnerable To Parkinson's

MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif. -- Sergey Brin, a Google co-founder, said Thursday that he has a gene mutation that increases his likelihood of contracting Parkinson's disease, a degenerative disorder of the central nervous system that can impair speech, movement and other functions.

Mr. Brin, who made the announcement on a blog, says he does not have the disease and that the exact implications of the discovery are not clear. Studies show that his likelihood of contracting Parkinson's disease in his lifetime may be 20 percent to 80 percent, Mr. Brin said.

Mr. Brin, whose personal fortune was recently pegged at $15.9 billion by Forbes, ranking him as the 13th richest American, said that he may help provide more money for research into the disease.

Read the whole story here.

Comments

[neurologymatters]

Neurological Disorders do not discriminate based upon your wealth, religion,and politicsd, all though some people are more pre-disposed due to gender and race. I applaud Mr. Brim for bringing his own personal increased risk public. We have numerouse health epidemics that are largely underfunded for scientists, researchers, and those of us who hope for a treatment and a cure. According to the NIH, there are at least 600 Neurological Disorders. Statistics are not available for each one, because many are diagnosed based upon guidelines-tests are not available. People go undiagnosed or misdiagnosed.

[BADEN]

I assume he has excellent health care benefits.

So....

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[gcallaghan]

Wheneticile reading the article, I wondered what is Brin's motive for so publicly announcing such personal information. Then it was revealed his wife runs the company that did the genetic testing and he invested almost $4M in the startup. So, the motive is simply greed.

[wagadog]

Not so fast. Maybe the reason he got involved with a geneticist in the first place was knowing he had a high probability of having a genetic predisposition. And how is it greed to invest in a family member's business? Even if you're prudent and smart, it's a risk at best.

Anyway, another angle on this is that unless genetic discrimination is really and truly outlawed -- in practice as well as theory -- this kind of information will continue to be regarded as "personal" and "sensitive" to be guarded at all costs due to the high probability of discrimination.

If I were Sergey, I would be also be lobbying heavily to make sure the enforcement regime surrounding GINA to be really effective. The enforcement regime is being put together right now, and even though the law has been passed, it does not go into effect until May 2009 for insurance companies, and November 2009 for employers.

So...if you're likely to have a genetic predisposition, it's inadvisable to be tested until after that. It may even be inadvisable to be tested after that, if the enforcement regime constructed around GINA is obviously ineffective.

[wagadog]

In addition to supporting research for the cure, it might also be worthwhile to support a legal aid foundation on behalf of people who have been the objects of genetic discrimination.

The law against genetic discrimination by health insurers and employers, Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) was passed in May of this year:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=bill-bars-genetic-discrimination

However, it has not been tested in the (largely conservative, largely pro-business) courts, and certainly most people who have been the victims of genetic discrimination are going to be in a very poor financial position indeed to prosecute their case.

Indeed, people who have a family history of genetically linked diseases are extremely reluctant to get genetic tests for fear of discrimination -- which has only very recently been made illegal.

So, even with GINA in place, it is a new law, and will need a couple of exemplary high-profile cases to establish its place in employers' minds. Just as it took years of FMLA violations being actually prosecuted under the Clinton administration for it to even be given lip-service...until, of course, Bush was elected, and employers knew they could go back to doing any G-D thing they pleased.

Or, to put it more succinctly, Sergei Brin can admit he has a genetic defect, but I cannot -- because he's rich and I ain't. Lets be realistic here.

[UltraClassic]

Let me tell you something. It don't matter how rich the guy is. If Parkinson's hits him, it will hit him hard with the same cruelty it hits everyone else. I've watched my dad struggle with it for 10 years. It's not pretty.

Why are you people so wrapped up about this guy's wallet? Is that the typical liberal reaction? Of course it is, what a stupid question. All the money in the world won't keep this condition from hitting him if that's the course it takes. And all the money in the world won't spare him from the same destruction of brain function that even the poorest amoung us would suffer. He will just eat a little better, that is, while he still can eat. Have a little pitty on the guy for Christ's sakes.