Genetics is a Modulator in our GER·O·SPAN framework, meaning your DNA shapes how lifestyle choices affect your body, but it does not determine your outcome. We use targeted genetic testing only when the result will change what we do next. Lp(a) is the single most action-changing genetic test we run, followed by APOE for patients with dementia family history, and pharmacogenomic panels when a specific drug is on the table. Most consumer raw-data reports generate anxiety without a clear protocol to act on. A genetic result is only as useful as the plan attached to it.
People tend to react to a genetic test result in 2 ways. The first is dread: "I have the gene." The second is a shrug: "Interesting, but what do I do with it?" Both reactions stop short of the useful question, which is what to do next.
In our GER·O·SPAN framework, Genetics is a Modulator. It is not a Fundamental you choose every morning. It is the dial position you inherited. Your daily Fundamentals (sleep, physical activity, nutrition) turn that dial up or down. Your environment and your relationships pull on it too. The genetic test is a starting point. The work of medicine is to figure out what to do with it.
What "polygenic" means
A single variant rarely tells the whole story. For most outcomes that matter to adults in their 30s, 40s, and 50s, heart disease, type 2 diabetes, Alzheimer's, the risk is polygenic: spread across many small variants, each contributing a fraction of the signal.
In 2018, Khera and colleagues showed that polygenic risk scores can identify people with 3 to 5 times higher genetic risk than the population average. The same group had shown 2 years earlier that adherence to standard healthy-lifestyle markers cut event rates by nearly half across every genetic risk band, including the highest one. The takeaway: the dial position you inherit is only a starting point, and where it ends up depends heavily on what happens around it.
This is the part most patients do not hear when their report comes back. "Elevated risk for X" does not mean you will get X. It means the levers we already know about, sleep, movement, ApoB control, blood pressure, the people around you, are even more worth pulling.
What we use, and what we ignore
Two filters decide whether a test belongs in the plan:
- Does the result change what we do tomorrow morning?
- Is the evidence strong enough to act on?
When both answers are yes, we test. When either is no, we wait.
What we order
- Lipoprotein(a), or Lp(a). A single lifetime measurement. About 1 in 5 adults has an elevated Lp(a), and the standard lipid panel misses it. If yours is high, your ApoB target tightens and the urgency timeline accelerates by years. This is the most action-changing genetic test we run, and we run it on nearly everyone.
- APOE genotype. When a patient asks about Alzheimer's risk or has a strong family history of dementia, we offer APOE testing. An APOE-e4/e4 result does not change the foundational plan, sleep, aerobic conditioning, metabolic health, and blood pressure control are still the work, but it changes the urgency of the conversation and how closely we monitor cognitive trajectory.
- Pharmacogenomics (CYP2C19, CYP2D6, CYP3A4, SLCO1B1). Useful when a specific drug is on the table: clopidogrel after a stent, an antidepressant that has not worked, a statin causing muscle pain, codeine in a poor metabolizer. Usually $200 to $300 out of pocket, sometimes insurance-covered.
- Hereditary cancer panels (BRCA1/2, Lynch syndrome) and carrier panels for parents-to-be. Indication-driven, decision-relevant. Ordered through Color, Invitae, or a similar lab when family history warrants.
What we do not order
Fishtown Medicine
A 90-minute conversation with Dr. Ash. A written plan you can actually follow.
- Whole-genome sequencing for healthy adults. Most findings are variants of uncertain significance. The cost-to-action ratio is poor for someone without a specific indication. One exception: patients who were adopted or grew up in foster care, where the family-history data source this article keeps citing as free and powerful is not available. In that case, the threshold for ordering broader testing is meaningfully lower. Even then, a thoughtful targeted panel usually does more useful work than a whole-genome blast.
- Consumer "raw data hacking." Uploading 23andMe data to third-party interpreters generates long lists of variants with effect sizes too small to act on. The output usually generates anxiety without a clear next step.
- Methylation overreach. The common MTHFR variants do not justify broad "you need methylated everything" supplement protocols. The clinical literature does not support the panels that get sold on social media.
- Ancestry-novelty SNP reports. Interesting at a dinner party, though they change nothing in your chart.
When the test changes the plan
Concrete examples from how we practice:
- Lp(a) comes back at 90 nmol/L (high). The ApoB goal for that patient drops from "below 80" to "below 60," and we start the conversation about statin or PCSK9 inhibitor years earlier than we otherwise would.
- APOE comes back e3/e4 in a 45-year-old whose mother developed Alzheimer's at 72. The Fundamentals already mattered, and now they matter on a clock. We are more proactive about sleep apnea screening, aerobic conditioning, and insulin resistance, and we revisit cognition more often.
- CYP2C19 comes back as a poor metabolizer in a patient who needs clopidogrel after a stent. We switch to ticagrelor. That is a change in care that a $200 panel made possible.
- A 23andMe report flags "slightly elevated risk" for 10 different conditions. We acknowledge the curiosity, and then we look at the labs and the life in front of us. The report does not change the plan.
The pattern: a genetic result is only as good as the protocol attached to it. When there is a protocol, we test. When the protocol does not exist, the test is expensive curiosity.
A small, optional starting point if you do not have old records
For patients arriving without years of lab work, genetic testing can be a respectful first conversation. It is never the entry fee, and it is never something we push. But when there is nothing else to look at, a targeted panel, Lp(a), APOE if indicated, basic pharmacogenomics, can tell us where to focus the next conversation without spending 6 months gathering paper records.
The same logic applies, with extra weight, for patients who were adopted or grew up in foster care. The family-history input the rest of this article relies on most heavily is, for them, often unavailable. In that situation, a targeted genetic panel is sometimes the most respectful way to begin filling the gap, and the conversation about what to test is one we run carefully and without pressure.
That is the only context in which we lead with genetic testing. In every other situation, we lead with the records review and the basic preventive labs first.
Key Takeaways
- Genetics is a Modulator rather than a verdict: your DNA sets the dial position, but sleep, movement, nutrition, and metabolic control determine where it ends up.
- Lp(a) is the single most action-changing genetic test we run; about 1 in 5 adults carries an elevated level that a standard lipid panel will miss.
- APOE testing is offered when dementia family history is present; it does not change the foundational plan, but it changes the urgency and monitoring frequency.
- Pharmacogenomic panels (CYP2C19, CYP2D6, SLCO1B1) are worth running when a specific high-stakes drug is on the table, often for $200 to $300.
- A genetic result is only as useful as the protocol attached to it; when no protocol exists, we wait rather than generate expensive anxiety.
Scientific References
- Khera AV, et al. "Genome-wide polygenic scores for common diseases identify individuals with risk equivalent to monogenic mutations." Nature Genetics. 2018.
- Khera AV, et al. "Genetic Risk, Adherence to a Healthy Lifestyle, and Coronary Disease." NEJM. 2016.
- Tsimikas S. "A Test in Context: Lipoprotein(a): Diagnosis, Prognosis, Controversies, and Emerging Therapies." Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2017.
- Yamazaki Y, et al. "Apolipoprotein E and Alzheimer disease: pathobiology and targeting strategies." Nature Reviews Neurology. 2019.
- Relling MV, Klein TE. "CPIC: Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium." Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics. 2011.
Fishtown Medicine | Articles
Frequently Asked Questions
Common Questions
Ready when you are
Dr. Ash reads every intake himself, and answers questions personally - usually within a few hours.
