In der aktuellen Ausgabe von "Nature" (20.1.2011) kommentiert (hinter einer ç%&*!"ç paywall!) der Bioethiker Hank Greely den Umstand, dass in den vergangenen 6 Wochen 2 wissenschaftliche Arbeiten (hier [ç%&!"*ç paywall] und hier [I heart open access!]) erschienen sind, die es nur noch eine Frage der Zeit erscheinen lassen, bis 10 Mililiter Blut einer Schwangeren ausreichen, um schon sehr früh in der Schwangerschaft von ihrem Kind eine umfangreiche vorgeburtliche genetische Analyse anzufertigen:

Two of the leading researchers in cell­free fetal DNA testing — Dennis Lo of the University of Hong Kong and Steve Quake of Stanford University in California — use different methods to analyse fetal cell­free DNA from maternal serum. Each has demonstrated the ability to detect aneuploidies — missing or extra chromosomes, such as in trisomy 21 (refs 5, 6). Last month, both researchers pub­lished proof that the fetal genotype could be derived for thousands of sites from cell­free fetal DNA2,3 — demonstrating the possibility of using maternal blood to test for all fetal genetic traits. There seems to be no technical barrier, given increasingly cheap genotyping and sequencing, to being able to test one sample simultaneously for chromosomal abnormali­ ties; for single­gene diseases, such as cystic fibrosis, sickle­cell anaemia, and Tay­Sachs disease; and for various non­disease genetic traits such as sex.

Commercial firms are already interested. Sequenom in San Diego, California, is work­ ing with Lo; another, Artemis Health of Menlo Park, California, is working with Quake; and still others are also exploring the technol­ ogy. For­profit development of these meth­ ods seems likely within five years, at least for chromosomal abnormalities, such as trisomy 21, and possibly for single­gene traits.

Checking for hundreds or thousands of traits with one blood test, early in pregnancy, could move prenatal genetic testing from uncommon to routine. (...) Most importantly, we need to start conver­sations, between all those concerned, about the limits, if any, to place on this powerful technology. Whether we view NIPD gladly as a way to reduce human suffering, war­ily as a step towards a eugenic dystopia, or as a mix of both, we should agree that the better we prepare, the more likely we are to avoid the worst misuses of this potentially transformative technology.