Parents across the Lone Star State are in an uproar after the Texas Tribune found that the Department of State Health Services covered up the donation of blood samples from 800 newborn babies to a forensic database created by the US military. Although the blood was taken as part of routine disease screening, the state gave the blood away without the consent of the parents, to help the Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory create a mitochondrial DNA database.
According to emails discovered by the Texas Tribune, Texas state officials publicized the use of DNA taken from newborns in studies on childhood disease, but deliberately dissuaded state employees from divulging the use of baby blood in establishing a DNA database.
The 800 samples were taken between 2003 and 2007, after a 2002 policy change that allowed the state to store the samples indefinitely, but before a 2007 lawsuit forced Texas to ask for parental consent before storing the blood. Currently, Texas does not need parental consent to take the blood samples for disease screening, and thus assumed they could donate the samples for research without consent as well.
The sample are not labeled, and thus can't be tracked back to any particular individual. However, the perception that Texas went behind the backs of parents erodes public trust in the DNA privacy system. And according to a recent panel at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, public trust is vital for attracting the volunteers needed in genetic studies.
Whats the big deal. I imagine anything having to do with science and research giving Texans the heebee geebees. It has nothing to with the welfare of thier children anyways. They should consider themselves privilaged to be part of something thats beyond their simple understandings.
What purpose did insulting/stereotyping Texans just serve? There has been a plethora of information, innovation, and research that has come from just the Universities in Texas alone. Before you go and insult more than 24 million people again, I hope you think about what you say.
I really don't see what the big deal is. It's just DNA that isn't even personally identifiable.
I think each individual should automatically have a legal copyright to their DNA (In the case of multiples, joint copyright). This copyright should apply to all uses except those assisted conception intended my at least one of the owners or natural conception regardless of intent.
How many owners do there have to be before an "excerpt" of DNA moves into the public domain, you ask? I'm not sure. It would be cool if everyone (everything?) having a natural occurance of a particular snippet of DNA would get a % royalty of each commercial use. Sort of like how music companies got a tiny royalty on blank casset tapes years ago....
Just think, if the tree in your backyard had a bit of particularly useful DNA, it might get rich, buy your house and kick you out to build a forest! :)
This is a big deal. This is basic immutable information about a human, and it is passed around without their knowledge. And we are talking infants here! May be one thing to do this to an adult, but you are taking this privacy from a human before they can even begin to speak for themselves! You're passing around the living code of who they are, before they can decide for themselves if they want to provide it for research.
And before you say that this information is kept separate from their names, maybe you should think about if their name even matters when you can identify them from a hair, nail, or blood drop collected for the rest of their lives(and after).
Sorry, but he didn't learn from the last post he made today that people don't appreciate his negative backwards responses because he didn't stick around long enough to care before coming to some other article spreading his disease.
I apologize for him. :/
We broadcast copies of our DNA all the time. You could get the same data by digging through people's trash.
My biggest concern is that some Pharma will patent part of my genome then restrict what I can do with my own DNA.
I dont think many people know this, But the government has already issued something that is already in effect that states that every newborn must have their blood taken and sent to a bloodbank and be cyrogenically frozen. This went into effect 2 years ago or so. So if you think this is only in the state of Texas, You're wrong. Every state in American has notice of this from the government. Look into this if you wish. Its pretty shocking details.
If you are part of the group of people thinking that it is ok for our government to take samples of matter from us for DNA sequencing I think you may want to watch a movie called GATACA. Not coincidentaly the title gataca is reference to the amino acids used is base pair chains of human DNA.
On a side note to that why shouldn't we be mad about yet another unauthorized liberty taken by our government without consent. They have only been stripping our constitutional rights for the last few decades. Alas you are right, we shouldn't care let them do whatever their collective hearts desire.
Actually, blood samples started being taken in 1973 I believe. So, if you were born after that chances are your blood was drawn without your parents consent. See, the govt is crossing their finger that the US is full of people just like epogue and ksmo who think "oh well, no harm no foul" so they can expand their master plan which is putting a chokehold on our freedom and liberty.
Seeker72 - you may need to read my post again.
I don't think the simple collection of information is inherently bad, nor does it necessarily infringe on our right to privacy. The use of that information is the part that concerns me. Especially the distribution of information about minors, without consent or knowledge. I could support gov't collection of voluntary blood samples at 18, maybe 21, given the right use of the samples. However, the use of this information from underage individuals is morally reprehensible, and the infractions should be prosecuted legally if possible, IMHO.
Nucleic acids, not amino acids, make up DNA.
Adenine and Thymine
Cytosine and Guanine
Anyway, GATACA is a good movie. I recommend it to anyone who has not seen it.
> Texas state officials [...] deliberately
> dissuaded state employees from divulging
> the use of baby blood in establishing
> a DNA database."
Privacy and medical ethics aside... Isn't is always a big deal when governments threaten sanctions if people tell the truth? "Lie to the public or we sack you!"
This is absolute crap science is great but taking the very lifeblood of someone who cant even decide for themselves its sick its horrifying and it is just downright wrong , well facism here we come i guess hitler didn't die afterall because his fukking concepts and psychotic ruminations live on.