Pa. town latest to force drivers over and ask for cheek swabs (dna) for federal 'study'
-
You guys put too much trust in the good old Federal Government. That's all I have to say.
-
You 'voluntarily' let a federal contractor swab your cheek, do you really think they aren't going to do a DNA test? And do you really think they aren't going to hold it in a database somewhere? I would never voluntarily give a DNA test to anyone under any pretense.
Why? What do you suppose they're going to do with your DNA?
Why? What do you suppose they're going to do with your DNA?
Chris, you don't really have to worry about it because your country has socialized healthcare. You're sick, you get treated. Here, you need insurance. Big pharma is so closely knit with big government and big insurance that I wouldn't be comfortable giving anyone a sample of my DNA. Once we can get cheap genomics, that's going to open pandora's box, and we could potentially know what you might be susceptible to by looking at your sequence. If the insurance companies were to get a hold of that privileged information, they could deny a slew of people based off of pre-existing conditions. I could talk all day about how I think employment-based access to healthcare is horseshit. The scientist in me really, really wants us to be able to develop that technology, but the cynic in me knows that it's going to be abused.
-
Why? What do you suppose they're going to do with your DNA?
Chris, you don't really have to worry about it because your country has socialized healthcare. You're sick, you get treated. Here, you need insurance. Big pharma is so closely knit with big government and big insurance that I wouldn't be comfortable giving anyone a sample of my DNA. Once we can get cheap genomics, that's going to open pandora's box, and we could potentially know what you might be susceptible to by looking at your sequence. If the insurance companies were to get a hold of that privileged information, they could deny a slew of people based off of pre-existing conditions. I could talk all day about how I think employment-based access to healthcare is horseshit. The scientist in me really, really wants us to be able to develop that technology, but the cynic in me knows that it's going to be abused.
Chris, you don't really have to worry about it because your country has socialized healthcare. You're sick, you get treated. Here, you need insurance. Big pharma is so closely knit with big government and big insurance that I wouldn't be comfortable giving anyone a sample of my DNA. Once we can get cheap genomics, that's going to open pandora's box, and we could potentially know what you might be susceptible to by looking at your sequence. If the insurance companies were to get a hold of that privileged information, they could deny a slew of people based off of pre-existing conditions. I could talk all day about how I think employment-based access to healthcare is horseshit. The scientist in me really, really wants us to be able to develop that technology, but the cynic in me knows that it's going to be abused.
See, now there's a sensible looking reason not to give your DNA I can get behind. But when people start refusing, insurers are just going to ask for a DNA sample before starting to insure you.
I'm a scientist and an optimist, so I really can't wait for this kind of mapping to become available. In fact, a friend of mine sent off to have his mapped, for about £200 or something. Kinda pointless, but still kinda neat!
While I think about it, insurers at the moment generally make more money than they give out. As such, there's no need for them to raise their overall prices - it might just be skewed somewhat so that people with dodgy genes pay more, when others pay less (see, optimist). But when all that is said and done, when you see your genes give you a 50% higher chance of, say, heart disease, that still only means going from 8% to 12%, for example. so there shouldn't be any big spike.
-
Let's say, your dna gets in a database, and you have a gene that says you are in a 10 percent
chance category of getting some cancer in your 60's.
Wouldn't that lend itself to abuse of the information? You'd pay more for insurance, to cover the ..
possible costs one day, from the beginning? In principle, information can be used for bad as well
as good.
OTH, if I ever inadvertently were a suspect in some criminal case? You couldn't
drive me to the lab fast enough for me, to let me hurriedly give them my dna to clear my name.
It's a double-edged sword. I prefer the privacy of information, unless there is a current requirement
for information to be brought forth. It can cut both ways. Good and very bad.
-
I'd rather they didn't have my DNA. Fortunately, I retired from the Military before they started taking DNA from everyone. Call me paranoid.
I'd rather they didn't have my DNA. Fortunately, I retired from the Military before they started taking DNA from everyone. Call me paranoid.
This. I don't trust the shit birds in Washington to make me a hamburger. I certainly wouldn't trust them with a mega database of everyone's DNA.
-
I'd rather they didn't have my DNA. Fortunately, I retired from the Military before they started taking DNA from everyone. Call me paranoid.
I'd rather they didn't have my DNA. Fortunately, I retired from the Military before they started taking DNA from everyone. Call me paranoid.
You served in Vietnam?
-
personally I'm not freaked out by the story. I assume if I have a problem with it I tell them No thank you sir may I please be on my way? If they say thank you sir have a good day then no harm no foul. But, as opposed to many of you guys, I think there should be DNA on file for every United States citizen. I think it's a much more scientific and intelligent way of identification then A 9 digit number that anyone can swipe. Plus I can't see what anybody would use my DNA for that would be so terribly egregiousThis. No one is forcing anyone to take the test. I would tell them to fuck off and be on my way.
WSS
Let me give you some examples. By having your DNA on file:Plus I can't see what anybody would use my DNA for that would be so terribly egregious.
WSS
1) you could be framed for a crime with planted DNA evidence.
2) your genome could be sequenced. Suppose you are found to have a near certainty of having cancer in your future. Do you want your employer, health insurance, or life insurance companies to know this? Having everyone's genome on file has huge implications on the very foundation of the system of insurance. We aren't talking just about cancer here, but a whole host of monogenic and polygenic diseases that could have a huge impact on your life.
3) suppose you are found to contain a very rare gene that confers protection against a disease, and a pharmaceutical company gets their hands on it and develops a treatment. They sell it for profit, and you don't see a penny. Is that fair that your genetic data was used without your knowledge and that you don't even get a share of the profits?
4) suppose your genetic profile suggests you are 10x more likely to commit a violent crime. Should the government be able to lock you up based on the threat of a committed crime? Do you even want them to be able to consider something like this?
There are dozens of other ways this could be abused. I work in genetics and I'd be the first person to oppose such a database of genetic data. It isn't paranoia, it is common sense to believe that someone WILL abuse a system like this.
FYI we already have cheap genomics.
-
They were very curious to see how inbreeding has progressed there.
-
Let me give you some examples. By having your DNA on file:Plus I can't see what anybody would use my DNA for that would be so terribly egregious.
WSS
1) you could be framed for a crime with planted DNA evidence.
2) your genome could be sequenced. Suppose you are found to have a near certainty of having cancer in your future. Do you want your employer, health insurance, or life insurance companies to know this? Having everyone's genome on file has huge implications on the very foundation of the system of insurance. We aren't talking just about cancer here, but a whole host of monogenic and polygenic diseases that could have a huge impact on your life.
3) suppose you are found to contain a very rare gene that confers protection against a disease, and a pharmaceutical company gets their hands on it and develops a treatment. They sell it for profit, and you don't see a penny. Is that fair that your genetic data was used without your knowledge and that you don't even get a share of the profits?
4) suppose your genetic profile suggests you are 10x more likely to commit a violent crime. Should the government be able to lock you up based on the threat of a committed crime? Do you even want them to be able to consider something like this?
There are dozens of other ways this could be abused. I work in genetics and I'd be the first person to oppose such a database of genetic data. It isn't paranoia, it is common sense to believe that someone WILL abuse a system like this.
FYI we already have cheap genomics.
I suppose the bottom line is we aren't putting that toothpaste back into the tube, genie back in the bottle whatever you choose. Technology isn't going to be stopped. I would much rather use DNA then a9 digit number more suited to the 19th century than modern day.Let me give you some examples. By having your DNA on file:
1) you could be framed for a crime with planted DNA evidence.
Much more likely that you would be exonerated for a crime of which you were innocent. Especially in these days where eye witness testimony is allowed.
Maybe we should ban fingerprints or blood type...
2) your genome could be sequenced. Suppose you are found to have a near certainty of having cancer in your future. Do you want your employer, health insurance, or life insurance companies to know this? Having everyone's genome on file has huge implications on the very foundation of the system of insurance. We aren't talking just about cancer here, but a whole host of monogenic and polygenic diseases that could have a huge impact on your life.
Knowing years in advance that I will almost certainly get cancer? Of course I want to know that. I'd imagine the insurance companies would want to start treating me immediately especially if the Affordable Care Act remains in place and the insurance companies are forced to pay for everyones endless medical treatment regardless.
3) suppose you are found to contain a very rare gene that confers protection against a disease, and a pharmaceutical company gets their hands on it and develops a treatment. They sell it for profit, and you don't see a penny. Is that fair that your genetic data was used without your knowledge and that you don't even get a share of the profits?
I don't see the huge evil in pharmaceutical companies making profit. Especially if it means ending Lou Gehrig's disease or childhood leukemia or whatever devastating illness you choose.
4) suppose your genetic profile suggests you are 10x more likely to commit a violent crime. Should the government be able to lock you up based on the threat of a committed crime? Do you even want them to be able to consider something like this?
I think you are watching too many Tom Cruise movies. What if what if what if... Hey what if your genetics show that you are 80 percent more likely to burst into spontaneous combustion while filling your gas tank. Sorry that one just doesn't seem very realistic. I don't think genetics can show what crime you may commit. I don't think genetics can tell me who will be the next president, dictator, mass murderer or Antichrist.
There are dozens of other ways this could be abused. I work in genetics and I'd be the first person to oppose such a database of genetic data. It isn't paranoia, it is common sense to believe that someone WILL abuse a system like this.
FYI we already have cheap genomics.
WSS
-
That 9 digit number can't be used against you in a court where the gov, or some other org, frames
some political person they don't like. DNA can be collected, or even manufactured in the future?
And placed in a criminal event environment, and a person, say prominent activist disagreeing with
a gov...would go to prison.
I'm sure it's been done in Russia/Soviet Union...
sounds like a movie....
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login