Ethics smethics...let's talk graphics.

I'm a little confused by the ABC's choice of graphic to illustrated a story headlined 'The Gene Genies' and illustrated with a double helix DNA strand (understandable) and Barack Obama (confusing). Now, if the piece was about Obama's recent reversal of stem cell research, the illustration would make sense. However, it quickly transpired the piece was in fact about a report on the use of genetic testing by insurance companies when issuing policies. In Australia. There was no mention of the US or Obama at all.

The piece went on to explain that one person had been found to have (and I paraphrase) 'a gene for breast cancer and a gene for ovarian cancer....as well as this HE also had a slightly increased risk of prostate cancer'.

Can someone with a better understanding of such things please explain to me how (and if) a man can have a gene for ovarian cancer and breast cancer?

The following story was about Obama and stem cell research, using a very similar graphic (he was sitting in same position but with his head turned the other way!) and a headline so catchy I have forgotten it.

It all just seemed a bit sloppy really.

And yes, I realise that in relation to these two topics there are probably far more important issues to discuss than their illustration on the ABC news but that's just not what I do.