[FoRK] (no subject)

Tracie K Meyer con10gent_sentience
Mon Oct 3 10:04:31 PDT 2005

mlp wrote:

"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
 human cloning. 
 "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 mailing list