I think the core research being proposed here is useful. If the recruitment is done well and honestly, and there really is the option to not provide one's DNA and data for other studies, then I think it could be fine. It would be a shame to torpedo the study if both the intent and the practice is and will be ok.
Participants could just choose not to answer the anxiety and depression survey, and not agree to DNA and data being used other than to perform this diagnostic survey.
I just think it's important to understand who the people are behind the study, and what machinery they have in place to help ensure that people donating data aren't inadvertently helping to produce bad science that feeds the stigma.
I wonder if someone like @dave30th David Tuller could interview the project director to get some answers?
Participants could just choose not to answer the anxiety and depression survey, and not agree to DNA and data being used other than to perform this diagnostic survey.
I just think it's important to understand who the people are behind the study, and what machinery they have in place to help ensure that people donating data aren't inadvertently helping to produce bad science that feeds the stigma.
I wonder if someone like @dave30th David Tuller could interview the project director to get some answers?