Your love for chocolates may have something to do with your genes!

It turns out that whether you like dark chocolate or milk chocolate may have a little bit to do with your genetics.

We know that our bitter and sweet taste perceptions are highly associated with different genetic variants.
A lot of work has focused specifically on bitter taste perception associated with a variant in the TAS2R38 gene. Some people have it and some don’t.
About a quarter of 23andMe customers don’t have the bitter taste variant — making them more likely to have a taste for hoppy beer, broccoli or dark chocolate. A variant in theTAS2R38 gene enables some to perceive the bitterness of the chemical propylthiouracil, or PROP. Some so-called supertasters not only perceive bitterness but also can discern more saltiness, sweetness and spice, suggesting that there are other genes involved in food our food preference.
So of course the TAS2R38 variant doesn’t explain everything. While surveys of in the United States show that more than half of Americans prefer milk chocolate to dark, among 23andMe customers dark chocolate wins out. Almost half of 23andMe customers prefer dark chocolate, while about 39 percent say they like milk chocolate. That may have to do with genetics, but it is more likely related to a mix of other non-genetic factors.
And there are plenty of genetic factors that researchers are still exploring. For instance, a genome wide association study done last year found 17 genes related to liking certain foods — including among other things dark chocolate, blue cheese and liver — that belong to the groups of genes that apparently have nothing to do with taste or smell perception.

All this just goes to show that, like love, our food preferences are complicated.

you can read the original article here:
http://blog.23andme.com/health-traits/chocolate-its-complicated/

Existing Technique Can Detect Fetal Genetic Abnormalities in Maternal Blood

Non-invasive procedure could make prenatal testing easier, but it comes with ethical problems.

Until last week, scrutinizing a fetus's DNA for indications of genetic abnormalities meant tapping into the mother's womb with a needle. Now there's a test that can do it using a small sample of the mother's blood. MaterniT21, a Down's syndrome test that Sequenom of San Diego, California, launched in major centres across the United States on 17 October, is the first of several such tests expected on the market in the next year. It signals the arrival of a long-anticipated era of non-invasive prenatal genetic screening, with its attendant benefits and ethical complications.

With the technology in place to sequence the fetal DNA carried in a pregnant woman's bloodstream, geneticists predict the list of conditions that can be detected by non-invasive means will grow rapidly. Another company, Gene Security Network of Redwood City, California, says its forthcoming test will also check for other genetic abnormalities, and Sequenom is studying the feasibility of expanding its test.

"There's every reason to think that in the future you'll be able to extract an enormous amount of information from that sequencing data," says Peter Benn, director of the Diagnostic Human Genetics Laboratories at the University of Connecticut Health Center in Farmington.

Sequenom's test sequences 36-base-pair fragments of DNA to identify sections from chromosome 21. Normally, the chromosome contributes 1.35% of the total maternal and fetal DNA in the mother's blood. An overabundance of this material indicates the genetic abnormality that marks Down's syndrome.

Sequenom is marketing its test as an add-on to current screening methods, which estimate the chance that a woman is carrying a fetus with Down's syndrome from ultrasound results and protein markers in the blood. Such non-genetic screening can detect 90–95% of Down's syndrome cases, but falsely indicates that up to 5% of women are carrying a baby affected by the condition. Sequenom's test could be taken after a positive screening result to help a woman decide whether to undergo amniocentesis, a test that extracts amniotic fluid with a needle and carries a small risk of miscarriage. A study published this month, and paid for by Sequenom, found that the company's test has a false positive rate of 0.2% (G. E. Palomaki et al. Genet. Med. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GIM.0b013e3182368a0e; 2011).

It could spare some women from having amniocentesis after a false-positive screening result. But Benn says that the test will also pose difficulties. For instance, because it would take 8–10 days to get the results of Sequenom's test, if a woman did still opt for amniocentesis, and the result confirms that the baby has Down's syndrome, there would be little time left to decide whether to terminate the pregnancy. And some women who test positive on MaterniT21 will probably choose to terminate pregnancies immediately rather than have amniocentesis.

"Inserting this new test in the way that Sequenom is proposing is very difficult, from the patient perspective, and difficult for physicians and counsellors to manage," Benn says.

Ethicists also caution that using such easy screening methods ever earlier in pregnancy might worsen the gender imbalance seen in countries such as China and India. And if it becomes routine to check for many different kinds of genetic abnormalities, ethicists predict that more couples may face the quandary of whether to carry an 'unhealthy' fetus to term.

"The idea that couples have choices about whether to continue their pregnancies may become strained because parents may be seen as irresponsible for allowing 'defective' pregnancies to go to term," says Mildred Cho, an ethicist at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California. Other ethicists worry that fears of eugenics will be raised if testing can be done for less-serious conditions.

Sequenom is solely focused on developing tests for conditions that are already part of prenatal screening programmes, says Mathias Ehrich, the company's senior director for research and development diagnostics. "We do not want to invent new applications. Our focus is on making existing clinical applications safer," he says. "I don't think that we are in a position to say that we should determine what hair colour the baby has."

Genes and Chromosomes: The Building Blocks of Life

Every human being has 20,000 to 25,000 genes that determine the growth, development and functions of our physical and biochemical systems. Genes are normally packaged into 46 chromosomes (23 pairs) inside our cells.

The pairs numbered 1 to 22 are the same in males and females and are called autosomes. The 23rd pair are sex-determining chromosomes. Females have two Xs and males have one X and one Y.

Sperm and egg cells are different from other body cells. These reproductive cells each have only 23 unpaired chromosomes. When a single sperm and egg come together when pregnancy begins they form their own new cell with 46 chromosomes. The human being that results is genetically unique, with a blueprint half from each parent.