Recently, a blood test developed by researchers in London appears to be able to predict whether a patient who is suffering from depression will respond to commonly prescribed antidepressants, according to research published by Kings College this month. The finding is among the most recent example of development of “personalized medicine,” which includes genetic tests and other tests that are used to determine the best course of treatment for individual patients. These tests can indicate how well a patient will metabolize a drug, or key factors in its effectiveness on a particular patient. The personalized medicine arguably can save months of frustration to find the right treatment for patients.

Employers and Insurers across America now say the personalized medicine, particularly genetic testing, has a great potential in workers’ compensation. The argument is that providers often bombard injured workers with medication, which may or may not work. The genetic testing could help to weed out the drugs that will not work and that, coupled with a patient choice, can be used to develop an “effective” treatment plan. At least one clinic in GA now even advertise the availability of genetic testing on their website.

However, there are numerous concerns and questions regarding this personalized medicine. According to American Medical Association (“AMA”), genetic testing will help physicians to identify a greater number of genetic risks of disease. However, in AMA opinion 2.132, the association also mentioned the possibility that employers will use the genetic testing to detect the risks of potential workers. Employers then may want to exclude workers with certain genetic risks because these workers may become disabled prematurely, are more vulnerable to occupational diseases, or impose a higher health care costs. Consequently, the use of the tests would result in unfair discrimination against individuals, who have negative feedbacks on their test.

Although the British research used a type of “personalized medicine” tests, it did not involve genetic screening of the patients. The British researchers took only blood samples from patients and measured the level for inflammation and inhibitory factors. In addition, the test was used for only sizeable number of patients who do not gain relief from the standard treatments. Yet, the genetic test proposed by American insurers and employers reveals an overall picture of an employee’s health, it is plainly an invasion of privacy.

The AMA mentions some possible guidelines for the adoption of genetic test in its opinion 2.137. First, all the genetic testing must be voluntary, and informed consent from screened individuals is required. Second, confidentiality of results is to be maintained. The results must not be disclosed to third party without the explicit informed consent of the screened individual. Last, employers must not use the genetic test to exclude the workers from the workplace.

While AMA provides some possible guidelines for genetic testing, it must be considered carefully because there are too many negative consequences, which will impact employment perspective of millions workers. Additionally, there are various other medical approaches that may narrowly tailor to the patient’s needs in finding the right treatment. Therefore, Georgia must not jump into the deep end of “personalized medicine” pool without having first learned to swim.

The Poirier Law Firm routinely, successfully represents injured workers.  You must have a zealous advocate fighting and protecting your rights.  If you or a family member has been hurt at work, call Poirier Law today for help and for a free consultation.