Objective: As sequencing of the human genome is completed, there is a need for population-based research to assess frequencies of genetic variants and their associations with human diseases. The authors therefore assessed the current climate regarding the donation and storage of blood for genetic research. Methods: Data from the American Healthstyles Survey of health attitudes and behavior were examined. In the 1998 survey, four questions regarding blood donation and storage for genetic research were posed to the participants. Results: Of 3,130 participants, 2,621 (84%) completed these questions. Of the respondents, 42% were in favor of both blood donation and long-term storage for genetic research, 37% were in favor of either blood donation or storage but not both and 21% were not willing to donate blood or have it stored for genetic research under any circumstances. Loglinear analysis demonstrated that the characteristics of respondents who favored both blood donation and long-term storage for genetic research were attitudinal; specifically, those believing that genetic research will prevent disease [odds ratio (OD) 2.9; p < 0.001]; those believing in genetic determinism (OR 1.5; p = 0.004) and those agreeing they would participate in government research (OR 2.9; p < 0.001). The model also demonstrated that characteristics indirectly associated with attitudes towards blood donation/storage for genetic research were demographic and included higher education, white race, living in the Mountain/Pacific or mid-Atlantic regions of the United States and positive family history of a genetic disorder (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Understanding the various factors contributing to knowledge, attitudes and behavior regarding the donation and storage of blood specimens for genetic research will contribute to future actions in communicating genetic research goals to the public and recruitment for population-based genetic studies.

Keywords:
Genetic research, Blood donation, Blood storage, Public attitudes
1.
Khoury MJ: Genetic epidemiology and the future of disease prevention and public health. Epidemiol Rev 1997;19:175–180.
2.
Plan and operation of the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988–94. Series 1: Programs and collection procedures. Vital Health Stat 1, 1994;32:1–407.
3.
Schulte P, Hunter D, Rothman N: Ethical and social issues in the use of biomarkers in epidemiological research. IARC Sci Publ 1997;142:313–318.
4.
Schulte PA, Lomax GP, Ward EM, Colligan MJ: Ethical issues in the use of genetic markers in occupational epidemiologic research. J Occup Environ Med 1999;41:639–646.
5.
Steinberg KK, Sanderlin KC, Ou CY, Hannon WH, McQuillan GM, Sampson EJ: DNA banking in epidemiologic studies. Epidemiol Rev 1997;19:156–162.
6.
ACMG statement. Statement on storage and use of genetic materials. American College of Medical Genetics Storage of Genetics Materials Committee. Am J Hum Genet 1995;57:1499–1500.
7.
DNA banking and DNA analysis: Points to consider. Ad Hoc Committee on DNA Technology, American Society of Human Genetics. Am J Hum Genet 1988;42:781–783.
8.
National Bioethics Advisory Commission: Research Involving Human Biological Materials: Ethical Issues and Policy Guidance. Rockville, National Bioethics Advisory Commission, 1999, vol 1.
9.
ASHG report. Statement on informed consent for genetic research. The American Society of Human Genetics. Am J Hum Genet 1996;59:471–474.
10.
National Bioethics Advisory Commission: Research Involving Human Biological Materials: Ethical Issues and Policy Guidance. Rockville, National Bioethics Advisory Commission, 2000, vol 2, commissioned papers.
11.
Maibach EW, Maxfield A, Ladin K, Slater M: Translating health psychology into effective health communication: The American Healthstyles audience segmentation project. J Health Psychol 1996;1:261–277.
12.
Khoury MJ, Beaty TH, Tockman MS, Self SG, Cohen BH: Familial aggregation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Use of the loglinear model to analyze intermediate environmental and genetic risk factors. Genet Epidemiol 1985;2:155–166.
13.
Stokes ME, David CS, Koch GG: Categorical Data Analysis Using the SAS System; chapter 14: Loglinear Models. Cary, SAS Institute, 1995.
14.
International Social Science Survey: Public Perceptions of Genetic Engineering: Australia. Final report to the Department of Industry, Science and Technology, 1994 (http://www. dist.gov.au/pubs/reports/genengin/).
15.
Singer E: Public attitudes towards genetic testing. Popul Res Policy Rev 1991;10:235–255.
16.
Singer E, Corning AD, Antonucci T: Attitudes towards genetic testing and fetal diagnosis, 1990–1996. J Health Soc Behav 1999;40:429–445.
17.
Singer E, Corning A, Lamias M: Trends: Genetic testing, engineering and therapy – awareness and attitudes. Public Opin Q 1998;62:633–664.
© 2001 S. Karger AG, Basel
2001
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.