Does the advance of genetic science require government regulation to prohibit "genetic discrimination?" Not so, says the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

Gregory Conko and Neil A. Manson offer several points:

• A genetic predisposition is not a foolproof prediction that a condition will occur.
• Contrary to isolated anecdotal reports, insurers do not currently engage in the practice.
• Health insurance is typically based on groups, the membership of which changes over time. Thus, a person with a predisposition today may not be in the group in some years, mitigating the underwriting risk.
• Any certainty that genetic screening could lend to life insurance companies would reduce the amount of reserves that companies require, thus serving as a force for lower premiums.

In short, they argue, arguments for increased regulation do not make economic or practical sense.