DNA and Right to Privacy

[bhunter]

A California legislator wants to increase an individual's privacy wrt to a person's DNA. Researchers typically use such information for broad studies that lead to new discoveries and likely saves lives. Now, is the privacy interest here outweighed by the benefits to the community that accrue from compiling such databases? Furthermore, is an individual's DNA, though unique, an attribute of the individual or the species?

Here's the article:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...-considers-dna

Keep in mind how much excellent research occurred from Henrietta Lacks' cells (HeLa immortal cell line) harvested from her in 1951. She unfortunately died from her cancer in 1951, but the HeLa cell line continues to help others.

[djv8ga]

It figures. Another idiot in Kalifornia trying do something stupid.

[merrylander]

You all know how good everyone is at keeping secrets. Suppose your DNA indicates a predeliction to certain cancers. Your prospective employer sees this and you don't get hired.

[bhunter]

Originally Posted by merrylander

You all know how good everyone is at keeping secrets. Suppose your DNA indicates a predeliction to certain cancers. Your prospective employer sees this and you don't get hired.

That is indeed an excellent point. IIRC correlation between the database information and any specific individual's identity is difficult, OTOH, I can undertstand the potential for abuse.

[noonereal]

Interesting. Seems like the answer to this needs to be somewhere in the middle. Available for research yet private as medical info is now.

[barbara]

Hippa laws address the potential abuse.

[bobabode]

I did read the article and Alex Padilla has a good point. The consent forms would simply have to reflect whether a subject agrees to additional use of their DNA in other studies. The UC estimate of almost $600,000 anually in additional costs seems an extreme reading of the proposed law.

Just update the consent form and I think we would see very little additional cost involved in protecting the subjects wishes and privacy. Most donors would simply check a little box that authorizes other studies using their DNA.

easy peasy- I would avoid declaring everyones DNA as property of the species as I'm not convinced big pharma would act in my best interests.
Not to mention that I have doubts whether you and I are the same species..
Did I really say that? I swear I'm jus' kiddin', baaa..

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by barbara

Hippa laws address the potential abuse.

So it's merely a case of not needing a new law but rather enforcing the existing ones?

[merrylander]

You can drive a truck through the holes in the existing rules. It would take a lawyer to translate the current forms - said he after signing about six different ones in the last two weeks

[BlueStreak]

I just want to drag the country back to the time of the founders.....in every respect. All of this medical research stuff is just the work of the devil anyhow. If leeches were good enough for George Washington they're good enough for everyone.