[FoRK] (no subject)
Tracie K Meyer
Mon Oct 3 10:04:31 PDT 2005
"Uh-oh. I wonder how safe are DNA records is in places like Family Tree
DNA or The Genographic Project even though they only track stuff like
mitrochrondrial and Y-DNA tests? The data for that kind of testing
isn't enough to create a DNA fingerprint is it?"
regarding: DNA Collection
This has been going on for quite sometime now its just being brought
out in the open. This is just more of the process to legitimize it and
the dumbed down more acclimated. I believe the link from ABC News has
been removed so here's a partial summarised text copy and history; this
is not exactly news i don't think...
Does Big Brother Have Your Baby's DNA? / Baby Steps to a Genetic
Privacy Advocates Worry Over Collection of Newborn Blood Samples
ABC News | July 18, 2002
South Carolina has defused a recent controversy over its practice of
freezing and storing infants' blood samples in perpetuity, samples that
critics feared could be used someday for DNA testing without the
subjects' permission or anonymity.
[ ... ]
"I know enough about DNA to know that the future is very uncertain as
what it can be used for," said State Senator John Hawkins
(R-Spartanburg), who authored the legislation and who has a 4-year-old
daughter. "Right now it is limited. But who knows what in the future it
can be used for. So I think parents should have the right to say
their children's samples should be kept or destroyed."
Hawkins said he wanted to make sure samples don't automatically end up
part of law enforcement or government DNA databases, or are used by
health insurance companies for screening policy applicants -- or even
"The thing about DNA (is) we don't know what we don't know, we don't
where it is going," he said. "So the prudent thing to do is to ahead
set down some rules for privacy now, before it's too late."
South Carolina residents are especially sensitive to privacy issues
lately. Four years ago, state officials came under fire for selling
information from 3.5 million drivers licenses to a New Hampshire
without drivers' consent or notification.
"Our state government has done an abysmal job of protecting its
privacy," Hawkins said.
[ ... ]
The controversy over the storage of the samples was fueled by
that some anonymous specimens were released for two genetic studies
without parent's permission.
A private genetics center in South Carolina received samples to study a
genetic disease. "The request for those specimens went through a review
board here at DHEC and we were told to release a small number of those
specimens -- less than 500," Dowda said.
The second request for samples came from researchers at the South
Carolina Law Enforcement Division, which wanted to study DNA profiles.
"These were provided to them, never used, and destroyed --
500," Dowda said.
Infowars.com | February 24, 2005
With the glossy UN campaign launch in South Africa to register all
at birth, we are reminded of recent stories about DNA databases for
babies in the US and UK.
Have a baby in a US hospital, and you can rest assured plenty of blood
samples will be taken from your newborn. The samples are not being used
to screen for the diseases, syndromes and medical conditions you are
eager to be reassured your child doesn't have.
Oftentimes they are stored indefinitely, raising the questions of
or not your baby's DNA might be pulled from the sample one day and used
in a national DNA database.
Databases. The National ID. The registration of all newborns: the
cataloging and numbering of every human on earth.
If I could only live at the pitch that is near madness
When everything is as it was in my childhood
Violent,vivid,and of infinite possibility:
That the sun and moon broke over my head.-preface,
'Feast of Snakes'
http://www.fastmail.fm - Same, same, but different
More information about the FoRK