DNA Databases

[Prodigal]

I was wondering if anyone else is at all concerned with the increased "data" gathering being carried out by western govs'.

I appreciate that with an increased amount of data on people, criminals can be brought to justice etc. sometimes many years after their crime; however the types of information that governments are choosing to record at present leaves me feeling slightly concerned for the future.

No matter what restrictions maybe currently in place on information gathered and how it maybe employed, governments & laws change, and not always for the better.

Imagine if the nazi's had had DNA records...I appreciate that's a rather far fetched example, but I am not trying to deny the obvious benefits only considering the absolute worst case scenario, (have a family meal tomorrow & black thoughts often loom large at such times).

What I was wondering was, if DNA testing for compilation into a national or international database was volantary, would you choose to have yourselves, & more importantly, your children tested for inclusion?

[drone]

I've always thought that when the police/gov keep data on non-felons, they are just being lazy. If I haven't committed (and been caught) for a crime, why do "they" need my fingerprints, DNA, retinal mapping, etc. Same goes for CCTV and the latest licence plate tracking stuff. Don't they teach police to solve crimes using their brains, instead of keeping databases on the entire population? :idea2:

Just because they can do it, doesn't mean they should.

(Tinfoil hat planted firmly on my head, and crampons on my feet to stay upright on the slipperly slope.)

[BDC]

It's inevitable. But I think that the liberties technology brings will outweigh the oppressive ways that it can be used.

Failing that everyone will be hidden by the pure mass of information anyway.

[Lentonius]

I get the feeling George Orwell seems to rule the world here...

although scientifically I am very keen to find out where my ancestor was 2000 years ago, that is a question DNA can answer...

[BDC]

I get the feeling George Orwell seems to rule the world here...

although scientifically I am very keen to find out where my ancestor was 2000 years ago, that is a question DNA can answer...
The answer is everywhere. Maybe you can trace your mother's mother's mother (etc) and your direct male line, but there is no way you can possibly find your 'ancestor' from then, sadly. All those chromosomes getting mixed up.

There was a programme on tv recently here that 'traced' some black people back to their 'home'. What rubbish. 200+ years ago? You're related to half the world that long back.

[Lentonius]

yeah... best you can do is just look 100-200 years back and look where they lived then and you can guess fairly accurately thats where theyve been for a long time

even so, researching, i think I am of roman descent, for many reasons...:laugh4:

(or an 'educated guess' more like):sweatdrop:

[Duke Malcolm]

I don't particulary like the idea that the government will have a database with DNA, fingerprints, medical records, habits, quirks, what I have for dinner, how far I travelled this morning, where I travelled this morning, what my eyes look like, how many partners I have had, my political opinions, and so on and so forth and such like and such, et cetera, etc...

A voluntary thingy would be fine, but certainly not compulsory. There is little need for the government to have such information of people if the people have done nothing illegal.

[Viking]

They should take the DNA of every newborn child, but the DNA should only be used if the person itself wants it.
Otherwise, it will only be stored in a giant database, wich the police can use if they have a DNA. It should be made that way, that only with permission they are able to search; and when they search, they will get up one hit. That hit will be (most likely)the guilty. They cannot get any DNA out of that database, only search for the DNA that they`ve found, and only with the right permission from some authority they can actually do so.

[Blodrast]

but, you see, once the DB is created, over time, LOTS of reasons or justifications can pop up that would entitle police or any other number of institutions to have access to your data...for your own good and security, of course.

[Zalmoxis]

I don't particulary like the idea that the government will have a database with DNA, fingerprints, medical records, habits, quirks, what I have for dinner, how far I travelled this morning, where I travelled this morning, what my eyes look like, how many partners I have had, my political opinions, and so on and so forth and such like and such, et cetera, etc...

A voluntary thingy would be fine, but certainly not compulsory. There is little need for the government to have such information of people if the people have done nothing illegal.
I agree, but they will probably do it anyway, to keep tabs on the population.

[Papewaio]

Insurance companines are already using DNA as reasons not to insure people, also as reasons to not pay out... as a person will 'already had the condition'.

If you do a DNA test and find out anything bad then you have to disclose that to your insurance company.

Not very fair as a lot of conditions that are associated with DNA are chances that you are more likely to get the condition if you are exposed to various pathogens, lifestyle or trauma... so they can deny you insurance based on your odds from one sequence increasing your chance of getting a condition... without looking at the net benefits (sickle cell, asthma etc).

[Prodigal]

I get the feeling George Orwell seems to rule the world here...
I know its paranoid but it all stems from learning that the UK population lives in 8-9% of the total area of the Uk, you marry that quaint little fact together with the size of the country, the number of people, & the fact that one fifth of all the cctv camera's employed globally are in the Uk...Well...:inquisitive:

The uses genetics can be put to are groovy in the extreme, problem is the reverse is also true, 50 years ago people wouldn't have believed half of what is going on today, what the world will be like in 50 more...Anyones guess. I think a healthy dose of the heebygeebies can't be all bad

[InsaneApache]

Insurance companines are already using DNA as reasons not to insure people, also as reasons to not pay out... as a person will 'already had the condition'.

If you do a DNA test and find out anything bad then you have to disclose that to your insurance company.

Not very fair as a lot of conditions that are associated with DNA are chances that you are more likely to get the condition if you are exposed to various pathogens, lifestyle or trauma... so they can deny you insurance based on your odds from one sequence increasing your chance of getting a condition... without looking at the net benefits (sickle cell, asthma etc).

Really? Is this in all Australia or just the state you reside in? I believe it's illegal for insurence/assurance companies to discriminate in this way under UK legislation.

[Strike For The South]

Thats direct violation of my privacy

[Ja'chyra]

While I can see the benefit of a DNA database I feel it is an invasion of privacy to add just anyone to it. I think that only convicted criminals should be stored on there, anyone found innocent should be removed.

Strangely though, I don't feel that the CCTV we have here is a problem unless they are abused as was found recently with people being watched in their homes.

All in all it's the controls that I have a problem with, if I trusted my govrnment enough that they would ensure that the information was only used for good e.g. used in solving crime not for insurance and certainly not shared with anyone, then I would be much more comfortable with the whole thing.

[Viking]

but, you see, once the DB is created, over time, LOTS of reasons or justifications can pop up that would entitle police or any other number of institutions to have access to your data...for your own good and security, of course.

No, they wouldn`t. You can only search through the DB to find a match to the DNA you already have found. No one can take out the DNA code from the DB; or maybe they could, but then the DNA will be followed by a number instead of a name, such that they cannot find out whos DNA it is.

[Duke Malcolm]

But what he is saying is that that would change, people would abuse it, less restrictions on who can search the database and for what reasons, and giving out more information from the database, e.g. names.

[Prodigal]

All in all it's the controls that I have a problem with, if I trusted my govrnment enough that they would ensure that the information was only used for good e.g. used in solving crime not for insurance and certainly not shared with anyone, then I would be much more comfortable with the whole thing.
EXACTLY!!!

But for arguments sake lets say you are mid 20's you have 50-60+ years left to live. You have a new born baby that has 80+ years to live.

The government controls what information is used for; which laws are passed; it even controls which bloody documents we can read about their desicion making.

We live in a time of fear, yet again, (see "reds under the beds" "commie threat" etc for details), lines are being drawn based on religion, & that is the worst path we can follow, because it draws distinct lines.

*I stand by the statement that the most bloodthirsty butchers that have ever lived, have fought in the name of their faith*

When I say DNA database, I think of my grand children's children, I think of the GOVERNMENT they will live under; that I doubt I will live to see...Lest we forget, there are lessons to be learned from the past, look to the future while you consider them.

PS - SFTS, they've already cloned you man, you're on TV in the UK 3 times a week :idea2:

[Viking]

But what he is saying is that that would change, people would abuse it, less restrictions on who can search the database and for what reasons, and giving out more information from the database, e.g. names.


If you keep the strict rules, it won`t happen. And such rules will of course be kept for obvious reasons.

[Duke Malcolm]

But the point was the rules will change...

[BDC]

But the point was the rules will change...
Part of living in the age we do. As long as people remain wary of a government taking complete control it will be ok.

[Viking]

But the point was the rules will change...

No... they won`t. :book2:

[Duke Malcolm]

How can you predict into the future and be so certain that they won't?

[Viking]

How can you predict into the future and be so certain that they won't?

How can you predict into the future and be so certain that they will?

There`s always a chance for that they will, but I take those chances for being small. Mostly because of the same reasons that people are sceptical to a DB in the first place.

[Duke Malcolm]

Is it not logical that someone in power will want more power, or money? And so they sell off this information, or, in the cry of greater security, allow the police to check to database for more than just finding a match for DNA, and thence allow the police to check on people based solely on information in the database?

[Viking]

Is it not logical that someone in power will want more power, or money?

That`s always to be feared, and not just unique for DNA. The law will take care of that.


And so they sell off this information, or, in the cry of greater security, allow the police to check to database for more than just finding a match for DNA, and thence allow the police to check on people based solely on information in the database?

The police can only search for match of DNA, that`s the only way a DB can help them in their work.

[Duke Malcolm]

That`s always to be feared, and not just unique for DNA. The law will take care of that.



The police can only search for match of DNA, that`s the only way a DB can help them in their work.

You don't seem to be getting to idea...

Laws can be changed...

This rule of only police and only for matches of DNA can hence be changed -- which my post suggests...

[Prodigal]

As long as people remain wary of a government taking complete control it will be ok.
Wary....Thanks, that's just exactly it....

Oh & for those that aren't wary, just remeber a few things...

BE PURE,

BE VIGILANT,

BEHAVE

- 2000AD

[Viking]

You don't seem to be getting to idea...

Laws can be changed...



I am sort of aware of that..


This rule of only police and only for matches of DNA can hence be changed -- which my post suggests...

The police have no argument for changing the 'match of DNA only' rule because it won`t help them more in their work. If the DB becomes avaible for more institutions than just the police, peoples personal data doesn`t have to be more threatened because of that.

[Blodrast]

The police have no argument for changing the 'match of DNA only' rule because it won`t help them more in their work. If the DB becomes avaible for more institutions than just the police, peoples personal data doesn`t have to be more threatened because of that.

But the police don't make the laws, do they now ?
Anyway, we can be as optimistic or pessimistic as we both like, but I have lots of good reasons from the past to believe that sometimes people abuse power, when given the opportunity. The point is that this sort of thing is relatively easy to abuse. Why ? Because access to data and information can be easily increased incrementally, under perfectly valid justifications - at least at the time of happening.

It is a lot easier to gradually impose things on people that otherwise would be outright rejected, were you trying to go all the way from in one shot.
"Today, we'll let some insurance companies take a peek at your records, and it's for your own good because you'll be better to get better rates - it's all in your advantage ! Of course,
we'll only allow access to highly scrutinized and accredited institutions whose moral standards are beyond any doubt or shadow.

Tomorrow (read "after some time"), we'll also give access to medical institutions and hospitals. This is also for your own good - this way, if for instance you have an accident, the hospital will already have all your relevant data, history of diseases, possible health problems in your family, etc, and they won't have to waste critical time with expensive analyses.".

I can probably drag on like that for much longer, or, for that matter, build my arguments more credibly and more elegantly, but I think I got my point across.
I don't see why this should be enforced unless you're a criminal/convict. If one wants to have one's data added to the database, that's fine - however, I should be given a choice about it, as long as I haven't done anything wrong.

[bmolsson]

There are no reasons what so ever to have a DNA database of your population. You can have an ID card with the information on and even have legal right to force a test. Registering people in large databases is just another way of sneeking in communism in to our lives and reduce us to drones...... ~;)

[Viking]

Imagine if you(as the police) have a DNA of the guilty, but have no idea who that might be. What do you do then? Search for match in the database of course! All of a sudden, you know who the guilty is.

[Strike For The South]

Its still a ghastly invasion of privacy

[Papewaio]

Anyone read how the Nazis used population databases as they moved into occupied countries (another gem from big blue btw).

With the databases of names they could go into a town, paste up a poster with all the names of 'under-humans' and tell them where to assemble for transportation.

Imagine a more 'nice' government using your DNA to determine which school you should go to, or colleges doing a check for athletes... or sports teams rubbing you out based on your likely hood of getting cancer and hence being a liability... can't happen, well you should read about what happened to Lance Armstrong to see what sports teams will do to a sick member... his managers turned up to him when he was in hospital for cancer, he thought they were there for morale support, they were their to fire him for not being up to physical form.

HR uses databases to determine what type of person should be recruited for a role... that is part of all the personality type of tests... imagine the use of DNA databases in these.

[Samurai Waki]

Did somebody say revolution? *grabs ak-47 from the closet* no? oh. come on you pansies!

[AntiochusIII]

This might be easier for those in America to understand (as I'm not sure if it happens in Europe) but it is clear that somehow, the system already abuses your information.

For example, your credit information. Here in America, once you have a "good" credit (pay your bills, use credit cards often - ha!, get regular salary work, have a house with mortgage and pay it regular...don't ask me why they consider some financial suicidal moves "good credit"), your mailbox will be flooded with letters from all sorts of companies, shady or not, offering you their "credit plans," blah blah blah.

That might just be annoying on the surface and a lot of trees cut down for all those papers, but...how the heck did they get this information again?

...

You guessed it. Sure, the system might not entirely be public, and therefore not entirely "subject to popular...whatever," but it still is practically compulsory to live in the United States to have some sort of credit.

And this is just credit information; your financial standing, something that seem perfectly logical to be open and transparent. Imagine what they can do with your DNA -- you. :shame:

Trusting the government is foolish. They are a necessary evil, attempting to be anything more than necessary, and they are just evil.

[bmolsson]

Did somebody say revolution? *grabs ak-47 from the closet* no? oh. come on you pansies!

Well, the reason to redo the police force to some computer geeks searching databases doesn't really work in my book, even if I have a AK-47 on the wall..... :book: