emily: she founded a genetic testing company on one big idea, to create a dna database that could move science forward. even hope to our deadly diseases. -- help cure deadly diseases. in 2013, the fda yanked 23 products off the market. this ceo anne wojcicki had to face a very public divorce from her husband, sergey brin. two years later, she has made a remarkable comeback with a first fda approved consumer product.

new funding, and a $1.1 billion valuation. joining me today is anne wojcicki. it's so great to have you here. the last two years have been crazy. it could have been disastrous for the company. but now you are back on good terms with the fda. how do you feel right now? anne: i feel great. i am super proud of the company and what we have accomplished. when you have to slog through and put your head down and there is a lot of work ahead of you and you're not going to see a reward for a couple of years, it's hard. i almost feel like we just climbed the first flight of stairs, but we're still climbing the empire state building. so there is a lot more to go. it is amazing we are back on the market. we have an incredible product. we have completely redesigned everything.

what i am excited about is this is the first chapter and a whole new book for 23andme. emily: you have the first fda approved consumer genetic test. anne: consumers can buy things like cystic fibrosis tests without having to go through a counselor or a physician. they can buy them directly from 23andme and get that information. emily: this tests for things like recessive genes. things you could pass on to your children. anne: there are things like your eye color. that teaches people about genetics and caffeine metabolism. which again is just really interesting, or lactose intolerance. emily: i would like for you to take me back to that day when you got that now infamous letter from the fda. anne: we were at an off-site planning for the future. we were all in great moods.

we had hired a great number of people. we had a lot of people that had started that week. what we learned is how much there was a disconnect because of what we thought we were doing with the fda and what the fda needed us to do. emily: did you think you could lose the company? anne: it took a while to understand. there is probably about a six where wee period talked to a number of lawyers. we talked to the fda. it became clear that there were not -- there was no easy option forward. emily: did you consider selling? anne: the idea that genetic testing is going to be a foundation for health care in the future was core to my being. i am wedded to this company for the rest of my life and i was not interested in selling. i was not interested in closing up shop and saying this is too hard. it was just a question of saying, we entirely need to

refocus. we need to hire the right people. we have a major miscommunication. we need to make sure we are executing the right way. emily: it was an arduous process. you hired a regulation chief. you hired people who could better interact with washington. how did you get there? anne: i got on the phone and called everyone i knew and said what are the right lawyers to talk to in d.c.? who should i talk to? how can we figure out the path moving forward? kathy had a tremendous amount of experience with genomic health. she understood genetics. she understood the fda and added a level of structure to the company that people could see the path we were taking and people could join on. emily: there is so much more you want to accomplish like the test for breast cancer and alzheimer's, those have not been approved. anne: that is the top my priority list. customers really want those results. those are the types of things that we are talking to the fda

about what that path will look like to move forward. i don't have any updates. was toyour original idea give consumers access to their own data and amass so much data that you could single-handedly move science forward. you say you have one million customers. is this the biggest dna database out there? anne: it's the biggest being used for research. what was exciting for me about -- 23andme what's , exciting for me about what we were trying to do is the hypothesis that if we have the world's health care data and all this genetic information, everything about what you eat and exercise and your medical condition and what you respond to, we are going to understand patterns and understand the genetic basis of disease and understand the basis for why you might respond to a therapy or why you don't. i walk into the physician and they say based on the data you

have given us, you are a couple of years away from being diabetic. to make that change, you need to , y, and z. that's my hope. you can actually have so much data and understand your predisposed risks that you can make conscious choices about what you are doing on a daily basis to mitigate those risks. emily: he has been a critical part of your story. you are divorced and you have two kids and two companies. how you go through a process like that? ♪ emily: your dad is a physics

emily: your dad is a physics professor and your mom was an educator. tell me about your upbringing. anne: it's interesting. i grew up next to people who did not do things for money. they did things because they loved it and things that they were interested in.

this idea that you question all the time, is just sort of core to me. emily: your sisters are successful. how'd you all relate to each other? anne: we see each other a lot. nothing has changed. my sisters are still my sisters. they come over for dinner, and they come still my close, especially my sister student -- susan. we see each other at events all the time. it's fun. emily: was is it about your family that raised three very successful daughters in completely different disciplines? anne: i think the core element is we all do what we love, and we take feedback very well. there are few things people can say to me that would insult me or i would take offense at. we were raised in a way that i think we became relatively confident in ourselves. none of us do things for the

money. i think we do things that we really believe in and are passionate about. emily: you went to yale and majored in biology. you were also a competitive figure skater and hockey player? then went into health investing. anne: and i randomly got a job offer on wall street and i originally said no to the job. i called them back and said babysitting is not that interesting. emily: how do you go from wall street to silicon valley? anne: i invested for 10 years and i was investing in everything from birth to death. i was understanding how the health system worked. the more i dug into it, the more i recognized how much it's a business. i went to one meeting back in 2005. there were 1000 people working on how are they going to maximize the billing outcomes

for the patients coming in so they could take him as much money as possible. the system is never going to change. that was me throwing in the towel. i believe there is such potential, the healthcare system i am investing and is not the one i want. for me it was all about start of movement where the consumer has a voice. emily: at a certain point you meant sergey brin. your sister had rented her garage to him. anne: they started google in my sister's house. i could notsay avoid him because he was always there. we would be washing dishes and see them in the other room. they were just there. i used to hang out at google all the time. there was free food and it was fun. i got to know sergei. like to be was that on the front lines of google? anne: i think sergey and larry, they did not start it as they

wanted money. they started it because they had the dream of having a world of information on their laptop. they could have sold the company and then be professors and life would've been good as well. they did things in their own way. secondly, i would complain to larry about the health care space and how much i felt like health care was just dysfunctional. he said you're either part of , the solution or part of the problem. it was a call to action. that was very much them. if it is bad fix it. you learned that sergei was predisposed to parkinson's disease. that became a critical part of the story of 23andme and how you communicated what you were trying to achieve. anne: it came out just around the time that we were starting 23andme. i had talked to some scientists about getting survey tested. tested -- certain day

-- i was talked out of it. they told me, what would you do with the information? i found that really offensive. how dare you tell me what information is valuable for me. it was convenient that we had a spectacular science team. they put the mutations we were looking for on the chip. i remember, i was sitting at the kitchen table and i called one of the scientists. his mom has two copies, is that what this means? they were surprised. they had not seen a lot of people that had two copies of that mutation and he had one. getting that information definitely catapulted us onto a new journey of being really involved with michael j fox and starting the 23andme parkinson's committee. emily: you have found new aspects of parkinson's. anne: we made a number of interesting discoveries about parkinson's.

we have some projects we are thinking about doing. we are understanding the genetic dictations that sergey has. we are talking about some of the things we need to do. emily: sergey has been a critical part of your story. you guys are now officially divorced. you have two kids and two companies between you. when there is so much wealth and fault and you are under so much scrutiny how do you go , through a process like that. anne: it's complicated. that is all i can say, it is complicated. divorce is never easy. we are very good friends. we see each other almost on a daily basis. we are really supportive of each other. it's the new reality for our relationship. emily: you are a single mom. do you have any advice from this time of your life? anne: you just have to accept that you do the best you can.

we just need, we just needed the ice cream. i think there is moments when it's hard. you do the best that you can do. part of it is also being gentle on yourself that you cannot necessarily do everything. part of what i think we have done really well, you optimize finding the best in everyone and focus on the friendship. emily: you live in the silicon valley bubble. normal -- seem so normal. how do you stay normal? anne: you stay focused on the things that are important. i volunteer in the school and i make sure that the kids do their homework. i see my family all the time. i still see all of my friends. emily: you have been really active with this issue with women and technology. how much progress have you seen and how much needs to be done? anne: there is an imbalance and it needs to change.

i think that the best things, that is to me a 10 year issue. i think we are also getting ethnic diversity in tech. you don't have to be the best at something in order to have an impact. everyone is really good at something. i think it's important that women understand there are a multitude of different roles they can have in tech. one part of my job, and my job is not to be intimidated. there are men and women and then you try to work with the men and women. they can be people that you don't want to work with. try to find those people, those anchor people who are going to support you. emily: what do you think about the situation that is unfolding? ♪

emily: i do want to talk about your dealings with the fda. what do you think about elizabeth holmes? anne: i have spent a lot of time with her.

i have a lot of respect for her mission in which she is trying to do, but i have stayed out of knowing the details of it. i think health care is changing quite a bit. and i think people are always going to be skeptical. i think then the onus is on us to be very transparent. emily: i understand health care and what she is trying to do is hard. after 12 years, should it be more involved at this point? anne: i can walk into any center and i don't need a physician. i can just have a finger pricked and get my information. i think people just want to see and understand the technology and understand the data. people are making life-and-death calls based on this data. they want to understand the why. emily: this is a $10 billion company. people think it is a fraud. do you think it's a fraud? do you think this is possible

what she is trying to do? anne: i'm sure it's possible. everything i know, she works incredibly hard. i have seen her discipline and how much she is working. again i'm not close enough to , the company to know about the technology. but i think that it's what everybody wants to know. everybody is excited about the potential of new technology and want to understand what that technology is. emily: how do you walk that line between your trade secrets and being transparent in the industry? anne: she is not required to have the transparency people are asking for. that's part of the disconnect. the fda has put out guidance, where they are trying to regulate the industry. if that is the call they are making, it will be good to have that same transparency across all diagnostics. when you are in the middle of a crisis situation it's hard to , ever evaluate. you guys are all digging in. as the truth comes out when you

are executing and you have more approvals, the things will speak to the reality. right now, there is a lot of discussion. emily: let's talk about the future 23andme. you now share data with genentech and pfizer. the goal is to incorporate all of this data into drug discovery. how is the drug invention going in health? anne: i love it. i am super excited about it. for people who have a disease, parkinson's is obviously one. fatigue or any of these autoimmune diseases, if we can use this data to translate into something meaningful, that is a spectacular reward for our customers. emily: what disorders are you focused on? i know you are doing a lot of work on lupus. anne: we are working on lupus with pfizer. we have a bunch that we are doing with big pharma companies. lupus and inflammatory bowel

disease and parkinson's, we are about to launch a few others. emily: are you going to do human testing yourself here? anne: what we want to do and what we have learned from pharma, they will react best if we come to them with a target. there will be a compound with some clinical background, some data about how that's functioning. there is a higher likelihood of success if we can come with that level of information and move that forward. emily: you would do human testing here? anne: not physically right here, but we would start doing some of our own clinical research for sure. emily: there is ancestry, they do some similar things. do you see google and calico as competition? anne: everything we do here is focused on genetics and engaging the consumer and making engaging products for them. calico is focused on anti-aging. i also, i always i wish these

companies well because i think it will expand the entire industry. i want to translate this information into really meaningful therapeutics. i want to come and say we developed the cure for lupus. when i think about my success moment, it will be when we have that kind of cure that came because millions of people shared their data. and because of that we were able , to create something. that to me is eureka. emily: any plans to go public? anne: i am not opposed to it at some point, but it is just a question of finding the right time. we will figure that out. there are definitely pros and cons. emily: is there anything you would have done differently? anne: for sure, every day. when you are pioneering, you are going to make mistakes. we hired andy page. the almost hired him five years earlier, we should have.

we would've been much better. there would have been easier business models than what we have chosen to do, but we believe in what we are doing and i think in the long run it's , going to have a massive impact on society. i think back to when we started the company, we had the lone voice. it would echo. the fact that it's there, it's happening, and i see the world where almost like in 1996 when the internet was just starting. this is virgin territory. ds.ee all the little bu it's all starting to sprout up. i think there can be this consumer health care world that is just spectacular and creates something parallel to the existing world. it is super complementary but it , reflects what we actually want for our health care. emily: i hope to see it. thank you so much for joining me. anne: thanks to you.

. .

sam: every year around november or december, many journalists will get an assignment that makes them feel -- >> gulp. sam: a little nervous. >> you are putting me on the spot. sam: they will be asked to write a story about what will happen in the coming year. >> the worst thing that a journalist can do is predict the future. >> i don't think anyone has made an accurate prediction wanted -- one. sam: predicting the future is a tough job. but somebody has got to do it. we found stories about the latest developments and medicine, transportation, and