Within five years, people will be able to buy a complete map of their genes for $1,000, said Dr. Francis Collins, former leader of the Human Genome Project, to a crowd of about 400 people in the Cancer & Genetics Research Complex on Wednesday.
Collins was the keynote speaker at Florida Genetics 2008, the fourth annual genetics symposium put on by the UF Genetics Institute.
The symposium, which cost UF about $15,000 to produce and includes talks from about a dozen researchers, began Wednesday and ends today.
Collins said the first human genome, the entire set of a person's genes, cost about $300 million to map. There are about 20,000 to 25,000 human genes, according to the Human Genome Project's Web site.
With genomes becoming cheaper and cheaper to produce, Collins said the potential impacts on health care are enormous.
With a person's genetic makeup mapped out, doctors will be able to develop individualized treatment plans that are much more effective.
For example, he said, doctors may be able to estimate, based on the characteristics of a person's genes, what that person's chances are of getting a disease and possibly start treatment long before there are any symptoms.
Collins said the rapidly developing science carries new dangers.
Some people are afraid employers and others may use the genetic information to discriminate against them based on their chances of getting a disease, he said.
However, he said, a new law signed by President George W. Bush in May makes it illegal to discriminate based on genetics when it comes to employment and health insurance.
Before ending his talk and taking questions from the audience, Collins said the future of genetic research hinges on the results of the upcoming presidential election and urged everyone to vote.
Funding for biomedical sciences is flat, he said, and the absence of science in important political decisions has created an unfortunate situation.
"We cannot tolerate that as a country for very much longer," he said.
In an interview after his speech, Collins said he favored Sen. Barack Obama for the presidency because his science agenda is "much more muscular and detailed."
"We have so many problems that our world is facing," he said. "If we don't have the science brains to guide us … our chances of remaining in a leadership role will diminish."
