Not GP, but personally I do not mind. I have voluntarily shared my DNA information with a number of people.
Health insurance is not important here (UK), and life insurance is much less of an important concern to me as I will not have children. But I can see why if that is not the case, you would be more concerned.
I do have some concerns about it being used by the police, though public availability is unlikely to make a difference there. I've never committed any crimes, but the police are known for using scientifically and statistically invalid methods to prosecute.
If it's valid trait that employer (or insurance) finds actually having negative impact - is it really a discrimination (other than you can't really say whether it's expressed).
In the US, it is illegal for an employer or health insurance company to discriminate based on genetics [0]. But if you fail to receive a promotion because your employer found out about your genetic disease, how would you know?
Same way you get to know your KPI's and other assessments?
I guess that act is good after all. No one can tell you've got an actual disease from these tests, even if on big scale the correlation most obviously is there.
Health insurance is not important here (UK), and life insurance is much less of an important concern to me as I will not have children. But I can see why if that is not the case, you would be more concerned.
I do have some concerns about it being used by the police, though public availability is unlikely to make a difference there. I've never committed any crimes, but the police are known for using scientifically and statistically invalid methods to prosecute.