Checking our bodies for unusual lumps and bumps has become a normal way of looking after our health.
But what about considering how our genes might predispose us to cancer or cognitive decline? Should we find out – even in cases where we are powerless to stop it?
In 2013, the actress announced she’d had a double mastectomy, having tested positive for faults in the BRCA1 gene, which gave her an 87% chance of developing breast cancer and a 50% chance of ovarian cancer. She later had her ovaries and fallopian tubes removed.
Jolie underwent what is called “predictive” genetic testing, whereby her significant family history qualified her for further investigations and then surgery to reduce her cancer risk.
But while genetic testing is increasingly becoming a feature for those diagnosed with cancer, NHS predictive testing for “unaffected” family members is under pressure from ever-increasing demand.
“There’s a real log jam,” says Professor Gareth Evans, medical genetics consultant at Manchester Foundation Trust and professor of cancer epidemiology and medical genetics at the University of Manchester.
If you don’t have cancer but have significant family history and, like Jolie, are approaching the age your relatives were diagnosed or died, you are referred through the NHS genetics service – instead of your hospital’s oncology department, he adds.
“If you want to be tested and you’re unaffected, the NHS doesn’t have enough genetic counsellors to cope with the number of referrals coming in,” Professor Evans says.
‘Ticking time bombs’
Tracie Miles, from the gynaecological cancer research charity Eve Appeal, describes some predictive testing cases as “ticking time bombs”.
“For unaffected patients, with say three relatives with certain types of cancer, they will be referred for genetic testing in their early 50s,” says Ms Miles, who is associate director of nursing and midwifery at the NHS South West Genomic Medicine Service Alliance.
“They’re like a ticking time bomb for those cancers, but can they get tested now? No. They’ve got to wait a year.”
Emma Lorenz, 48, from London, says had her half-sister Carly Moosah not been turned away for NHS predictive testing in 2017, doctors may have caught both their cancers earlier and avoided her having a hysterectomy.
She was diagnosed with stage 4b ovarian cancer in July 2019, with her sister noticing a swelling under her own arm and being diagnosed with breast cancer a few months later in December.
“My sister tried to get tested on the NHS around three years before her diagnosis,” she tells Sky News.
Carly’s mother and grandmother both died of breast cancer in their 50s, having been diagnosed in their 40s.
Eventually, private tests revealed they had both inherited faulty BRCA1 genes from their father, whose Ashkenazi Jewish heritage means a six-times greater risk of BRCA mutations than the general population.
Emma, who is now cancer-free after surgery and multiple rounds of therapy and drugs, says: “If my sister had been tested before, both our cancer stories could have been so very different.
“My late-stage diagnosis also took my choice of having children away.”
But despite being tested much later than they could have been, Emma still credits their tests with saving their lives.
“Getting my BRCA diagnosis probably ultimately saved my sister’s life,” she says.
“And because I also tested positive for the BRCA gene, I was offered an incredible pill that I would not have had access to if I didn’t.
“So on the one hand, it was a very hard diagnosis because of what it meant for my family, but on the other, it was a good thing in terms of treatment.”
Genetic testing and cancer
The NHS offers tests for faults in the following cancer-related genes:
BRCA1 and BRCA2 (breast and ovarian cancer)
PALB2 (breast, ovarian, prostate, and pancreatic cancer)
ATM (breast cancer)
CHEK2 (breast cancer)
You qualify for testing if you:
Had breast cancer at 40 or younger
Had it in both breasts at 50 or younger
Had triple negative breast cancer at 60 or younger
Had ovarian cancer at any age
Had breast cancer at 45 or younger and so did a first-degree relative
Had breast and ovarian cancer at any age
Had male breast cancer at any age
Have at least one Ashkenazi Jewish grandparent
Had any cancer and a Manchester score of 15 or higher (10% risk)
Have not had cancer but have a Manchester score of 20 or higher
‘Some people would rather not know’
Predictive genetic testing is also available on the NHS for certain forms of dementia.
People who have a close relative with frontotemporal dementia, which has a proven genetic link, or several relatives with an early onset form of the disease qualify.
But with no cure for either, or various other neurological diseases such as Parkinson’s, the decision to get tested is much more complex.
“If you’ve got a cancer-causing change in the BRCA gene, you can have surgery or screenings, which reduce your chances of getting cancer,” says Dr Alisdair McNeill, NHS clinical genetics consultant and senior clinical lecturer in neurogenetics at the University of Sheffield.
“But there are currently no cures for genetic brain diseases like some rare forms of dementia, so the benefits and motivations for having that test are different to the situation of cancer running in families.”
He adds that a positive test result can allow people to make more informed choices about their futures, careers, or to undergo IVF treatment to help prevent faulty genes from being passed to children.
But he says: “There are some misconceptions that there are things people can do after their diagnosis – and we often have to correct them in the very sad absence of any treatment.”
The NHS says that while a predictive test result “may reduce any stress and anxiety that comes from not knowing”, “a positive result may cause permanent anxiety” and “some people would rather not know about their risk”.
Genetic testing and dementia
The NHS offers genetic testing for dementia if:
You have a first-degree relative who has been diagnosed with frontotemporal dementia
You have more than one relative diagnosed with any dementia at 65 or younger
Alzheimer’s result at 27
Jayde Greene, from Hertfordshire, decided to get tested for PSEN1 gene mutations, associated with familial early-onset Alzheimer’s disease, after her father, two uncles, and aunt were all diagnosed in their 40s.
She says that while she initially tried to keep her family history from her mind, the funeral of her father’s twin not long after the birth of her son Freddie in 2016 saw her get tested aged 27.
“That’s when I decided I had to know,” she tells Sky News. “So I could prepare and know how to live the rest of my life with my son.”
She received a positive result – meaning she’s at high risk of the disease – and in the days afterwards, she says she had suicidal thoughts and attempted an overdose.
“The first time I was on my own I started thinking all manner of things – that I couldn’t bear to be the way my dad was and have my son look at me like that.
“That he wasn’t even a year old yet, that if I went now, he wouldn’t remember me, and it’d hurt less.”
But she changed her mind, she says, and is now preparing to tell her son about her result when he is a teenager, before she reaches the age her relatives started showing symptoms.
“I heard my son crying and I stopped what I was doing,” she says.
“I’ve never thought that way again, but I want people to know that feeling that way is also normal.”
Now aged 34, she stresses that although she tries to remain “90% hopeful”, there are “still bad days”.
“Medicine is making leaps and bounds,” she says. “But I also keep feeling that it’s been seven years and there’s been nothing yet.
“So there are days when my hope is gone and I’m convinced at 42, like my dad, that’ll be it.”
Not enough genetic counsellors
Genetic counsellors are experts who help assess people’s genetic risk and guide them through the process of testing. There are only around 300 of them in the UK.
Professor Evans says that without their scientific expertise and psychological support, many women risk “falling apart” after a positive test result for a cancer-related gene.
But with waits of six months or a year for people who don’t already have cancer, increasing numbers are either buying testing kits online or trying to get results through private labs, which offer little-to-no genetic counselling, according to the experts.
“There is published evidence that programmes that use raw data from ancestry tests are only 50% accurate,” Professor Evans warns. “So you could be wrongly told you have a genetic fault, or if there is a fault in your family, told you don’t have one.”
These people often try to re-enter the NHS, he adds, to find it will not accept their result, meaning their waiting time starts over.
What does a genetic counsellor do?
Genetic counsellors are experts in genetics that work in the NHS to help people understand:
The risks and benefits of having a genetic test;
The potential results of a test and what they mean;
How family members may be affected if the test result shows a serious health condition runs in the family;
The risk of passing on a health condition to children;
The options if your child has an inherited health condition and you do not want your next child to inherit it.
They have usually completed a three-year undergraduate degree in genetics, followed by a two-year masters programme.
Ultimately, the decision to get tested is a personal choice, which also depends on the condition being tested for.
Professor Evans, who developed the Manchester scoring system for cancer testing, stresses the importance of genetic counselling in either scenario.
“If you carry a faulty BRCA1 or 2, your risk of breast cancer can be as high as 80% – that’s a really considerable risk,” he says. “So it’s about preparing people for the level of risk they’re going to be at.
“But if you do test positive, there’s a lot we can do about it and we can really reduce your likelihood of dying from cancer.”
Testing is ‘scary’ but ‘knowledge is power’
Kellie Armer, 34, from Lancashire, is having a preventative double mastectomy this year after testing positive for a BRCA1 mutation at 26.
She was aware of her genetic cancer risk from around 18 but says she “wasn’t mentally ready” then to get tested.
Now, having had two children and run the London Marathon for charity Prevent Breast Cancer, she says: “At 18 I didn’t want to go down that road. I was a bit too scared still.
“But now it’s about a future with my kids. Being able to see my girls grow up outweighs any selfish thing like being career-driven and not wanting to take time off work – or worrying about being unattractive.”
Emma says she found her BRCA test result distressing.
“I thought I handled my cancer as well as I possibly could,” she says. “But the thing that probably upset me the most was finding out I had the BRCA gene.
“The idea my family, including my niece and nephew aged four and six at the time, would have to think about this, or get sick in the future, deeply upset me.”
Her medical team has recommended she gets preventative breast surgery. Although she wants to wait a few more years, she knows she “can’t put it off indefinitely”.
“That knowledge is power – it’s the key that unlocks what our future health holds,” she says. “So for me, it’s better to know than hide your head in the sand and pretend it’s not happening.”
Although there is still no cure for Alzheimer’s, Jayde agrees.
“I’d never change my decision to know,” she says. “As much as it’s come with bad, it’s also come with a lot of good. If I could go back, I’d do it and find out again.”
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Experts are calling for the NHS thresholds for predictive genetic testing to be lowered and more public health campaigns around cancer and genetic risk.
Professor Evans says: “We should be expanding access to more unaffected people, but at the moment there just isn’t the manpower in NHS genetics to cope with more people coming in.”
Sky News has contacted NHS England for comment.
Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK. In the US, call the Samaritans branch in your area or 1 (800) 273-TALK
A murder investigation has been launched after a woman’s body was found in the boot of a car in east London.
Detectives said a murder inquiry has been launched into the “suspicious” discovery in Ilford.
The woman, who has not been named but is from Corby in Northamptonshire, may have been the victim of a “targeted incident”, police say.
“Fast track” enquiries were made after the force was contacted by a member of the public with concerns about the welfare of the woman.
This led to the discovery of a body inside a car boot.
Northamptonshire Police said: “The investigation is ongoing and there will be continued police activity over the weekend in various locations, including Corby and Ilford.
“Although we believe that this was a targeted incident and there is no wider risk to members of the public, extra patrols will be taking place in Corby in the coming days for reassurance purposes.”
Detectives from the East Midlands Special Operations Unit major crime team and the Metropolitan Police are working on the case, to try and establish the circumstances that led to the woman’s death.
Essex Police say they are investigating an alleged criminal offence of inciting racial hatred, after Daily Telegraph columnist Allison Pearson said she was “dumbfounded and upset” when officers knocked on her door last Sunday.
Ms Pearson revealed she was told she was being investigated over a year-old deleted post online.
She said she wasn’t informed which post had been reported, but suggested it could have been related to the 7 October attacks in Israel or pro-Palestine marches.
She claimed the officers told her she was being investigated for a NCHI (a none crime hate incident) an incident involving an act which is perceived to be motivated by hostility or prejudice towards persons with a particular characteristic, but is not illegal.
NCHI reports have long been controversial, with many citing free speech concerns, and Ms Pearson’s account of the police visit has led to widespread support from Conservatives and online commentators, including Tory leader Kemi Badenoch.
But an Essex Police spokesperson has told Sky News its investigation was never for an NCHI, and that the matter was always being treated as an investigation into an alleged criminal offence of inciting racial hatred.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Speaking on her Planet Normal podcast on Wednesday, Ms Pearson said she found the visit “chilling”.
More from Politics
“I was dumbfounded, upset, it’s not very nice,” she said. “I was in my dressing gown on the step of the house, these two coppers were there just outside the door.
“There were people gathering for the Remembrance Day parade so there were people watching from the other side of the road.
Advertisement
“Whatever I did or didn’t tweet, if somebody found it offensive, that to me is still not a reason for two policemen to come to my house on a Sunday morning.
“You know, they don’t do that for burglars, do they? We know policing is under-resourced and they are unable to attend often quite serious crimes.
“This was the most extraordinary overreach and state intrusion into my private life and I don’t think I did anything wrong and I think their response was outrageous.”
In a statement, Essex Police said: “Officers attended an address in Essex and invited a woman to come to a voluntary interview.
“They said it related to an investigation into an alleged offence of inciting racial hatred, linked to a post on social media.
“For clarity: a complaint of a possible criminal offence was made to the police and this is why we called; to arrange an interview.
“Everyone was polite and professional throughout the brief conversation.”
They said an officer told Ms Pearson: “It’s gone down as an incident or offence of potentially inciting racial hatred online. That would be the offence.”
Essex Police say they have complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) over what they call “false reporting” regarding the ongoing investigation.
What is a non-crime hate incident?
Non-crime hate incidents (NCHIs) are defined by the government as an incident involving an act which is perceived to be motivated by hostility or prejudice towards persons with a particular characteristic.
Those characteristics can include race, religion, disability, sexual orientation and transgender identity.
These incidents do not amount to a criminal offence, but they are reported to police and recorded in case they escalate into more serious harm or indicate heightened community tensions.
It can be reported to police by anyone, whether they are directly affected by the alleged NCHI or not.
Not all incidents reported to police are recorded as NCHIs.
They need to meet this threshold, according to the government: “A single distinct event or occurrence which disturbs an individual’s, group’s or community’s quality of life or causes them concern.”
Furthermore, the personal data of the person reported should only be included in the reports if the incident in question presents a “real risk of significant harm” to individuals or groups with a particular characteristic and/or a real risk that a future criminal offence may take place against them.
The origins of NCHI recordings stem from the murder of Stephen Lawrence in 1993, who was murdered by a gang of racist attackers in southeast London as he ran to catch a bus.
An inquiry into his death in 1999 called for the creation of “a comprehensive system of reporting and recording of all racist incidents and crimes”.
The first guidance on NCHI was published in 2005, but there have been updates over the years in response to scrutiny over protecting free speech.
The latest guidance was published in June 2023, when an updated code of practice set out a “common sense and proportionate approach that should be adopted by the police”.
The guidance, introduced under the Conservative government, clarified “that debate, humour, satire and personally-held views which are lawfully expressed are not, by themselves, grounds for the recording of an NCHI” and that an NCHI should not be recorded if police deem a report to be “trivial” or “irrational”.
In an interview with The Telegraph published yesterday, Kemi Badenoch said police visiting a journalist over a social media post was “absolutely wrong” and that “we need to look at the laws around non-crime hate incidents”.
“There has been a long-running problem with people not taking free speech seriously,” she said.
She challenged the prime minister to review the laws, saying: “Keir Starmer says he is someone who believes in these things. Now he needs to actually show that he does believe it. All we’ve seen from him is the opposite.”
Ms Badenoch added: “We need to stop this behaviour of people wasting police time on trivial incidents because they don’t like something, as if they’re in a nursery.
“It’s like children reporting each other. And I think that in certain cases, the police do it because they’re afraid that if they don’t do it, they will also be accused of not taking these issues seriously.”
Essex Police said the officers went to the address to invite Ms Pearson to attend a voluntary interview as part of their investigation, which was passed to them by another force.
“The report relates to a social media post which was subsequently removed,” the statement read.
“An investigation is now being carried out under Section 17 of the Public Order Act.”
Essex Police also said they made attempts to contact Ms Pearson before the visit.
Other prominent Conservative voices such as Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and Chris Philp have also leapt to Ms Pearson’s defence online, as has X owner Elon Musk, who quoted a post about the incident and said: “This needs to stop.”
Police commentator Graham Wettone told Sky News the police are “duty bound to investigate allegations of crime”.
“They’ve had an allegation of crime made there,” he said. “They will investigate it. If at the end of this they decide that no criminal offence has been committed – and we’re not at that stage yet – then it can still be recorded as a none crime hate incident.”
The police, he said, are duty bound to keep a record of none crime hate incidents.
“Parliament said they want the police to do this, to investigate and record incidents like this. So they are doing exactly what parliament and society asked them to do, and they are getting criticism for doing what people want.”
Sir Keir Starmer has said he will defend the decisions made in the budget “all day long” amid anger from farmers over inheritance tax changes.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced last month in her key speech that from April 2026, farms worth more than £1m will face an inheritance tax rate of 20%, rather than the standard 40% applied to other land and property.
The announcement has sparked anger among farmers who argue this will mean higher food prices, lower food production and having to sell off land to pay for the tax.
Sir Keir defended the budget as he gave his first speech as prime minister at the Welsh Labour conference in Llandudno, North Wales, where farmers have been holding a tractor protest outside.
Sir Keir admitted: “We’ve taken some extremely tough decisions on tax.”
He said: “I will defend facing up to the harsh light of fiscal reality. I will defend the tough decisions that were necessary to stabilise our economy.
“And I will defend protecting the payslips of working people, fixing the foundations of our economy, and investing in the future of Britain and the future of Wales. Finally, turning the page on austerity once and for all.”
He also said the budget allocation for Wales was a “record figure” – some £21bn for next year – an extra £1.7bn through the Barnett Formula, as he hailed a “path of change” with Labour governments in Wales and Westminster.
And he confirmed a £160m investment zone in Wrexham and Flintshire will be going live in 2025.
Advertisement
‘PM should have addressed the protesters’
Among the hundreds of farmers demonstrating was Gareth Wyn Jones, who told Sky News it was “disrespectful” that the prime minister did not mention farmers in his speech.
He said “so many people have come here to air their frustrations. He (Starmer) had an opportunity to address the crowd. Even if he was booed he should have been man enough to come out and talk to the people”.
He said farmers planned to deliver Sir Keir a letter which begins with “don’t bite the hand that feeds you”.
Mr Wyn Jones told Sky News the government was “destroying” an industry that was already struggling.
“They’re destroying an industry that’s already on its knees and struggling, absolutely struggling, mentally, emotionally and physically. We need government support not more hindrance so we can produce food to feed the nation.”
He said inheritance tax changes will result in farmers increasing the price of food: “The poorer people in society aren’t going to be able to afford good, healthy, nutritious British food, so we have to push this to government for them to understand that enough is enough, the farmers can’t take any more of what they’re throwing at us.”
Mr Wyn Jones disputed the government’s estimation that only 500 farming estates in the UK will be affected by the inheritance tax changes.
“Look, a lot of farmers in this country are in their 70s and 80s, they haven’t handed their farms down because that’s the way it’s always been, they’ve always known there was never going to be inheritance tax.”
On Friday, Sir Keir addressed farmers’ concerns, saying: “I know some farmers are anxious about the inheritance tax rules that we brought in two weeks ago.
“What I would say about that is, once you add the £1m for the farmland to the £1m that is exempt for your spouse, for most couples with a farm wanting to hand on to their children, it’s £3m before anybody pays a penny in inheritance tax.”
Ministers said the move will not affect small farms and is aimed at targeting wealthy landowners who buy up farmland to avoid paying inheritance tax.
But analysis this week said a typical family farm would have to put 159% of annual profits into paying the new inheritance tax every year for a decade and could have to sell 20% of their land.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
The Country and Land Business Association (CLA), which represents owners of rural land, property and businesses in England and Wales, found a typical 200-acre farm owned by one person with an expected profit of £27,300 would face a £435,000 inheritance tax bill.
The plan says families can spread the inheritance tax payments over 10 years, but the CLA found this would require an average farm to allocate 159% of its profits each year for a decade.
To pay that, successors could be forced to sell 20% of their land, the analysis found.