Scientists To Post Individuals' DNA Sequences To Web 219
isBandGeek() writes "With shocking disregard to their personal privacy, at least 10 people volunteered to release their entire medical records and DNA sequences in order to get their DNA decoded and analyzed. 'They include Steven Pinker, the prominent Harvard University psychologist and author, Esther Dyson, a trainee astronaut and Misha Angrist, an assistant professor at Duke University. They have each donated a piece of skin to the project at Harvard University and agreed to have the results posted on the internet. The three are among the first 10 volunteers in the Personal Genome Project, a study at Harvard University Medical School aimed at challenging the conventional wisdom that the secrets of our genes are best kept to ourselves. The goal of the project is to speed medical research by dispensing with the elaborate precautions traditionally taken to protect the privacy of human subjects."
Re:I'd do this in a second (Score:5, Informative)
It's not just about the medical aspect of it, you know. It's amazing what you can do with someone's information when they're freely giving it to you.
In a legal setting, you'd be surprised at the lengths that law enforcement agencies go through to collect DNA samples from individuals who may not want to cooperate with them. The old "Would you like some coffee, soda, smoke" bit comes to mind when you want to collect DNA from a suspect.
Something like this stunt, while great from a PR perspective, just simply makes it possible for insurance companies to deny them coverage in the future, allows law enforcement agencies to add their genetic profiles to their databases, etc, and they can't argue against it with the 'invasion of privacy' line. They volunteered it themselves.
Re:I'd do this in a second (Score:2, Informative)
Re:I'd do this in a second (Score:2, Informative)
A country that cares about its citizens doesn't try to take over the health care industry, it allows people to get the amount or level of insurance they want and don't overload the system by making it free for all. Free for all means mediocre or poor for everyone.
That's a bunch of crap, and here's why: If you have the money, you can still pay for care in cash if you want to. No one will stop you.
There is no reason why we should pay orders of magnitude more (even with "health insurance") for health care than people in other countries with the same life expectancy... for example, Cuba.
Hawaii has just dropped free health care for children because, duh, people who could pay for it stopped paying for it and the free system overloaded.
If the source of funding for Hawaii's health care system was flawed, it still doesn't mean the idea of national health is flawed. Nice try, though.
Funny how people who demand free health care for all can't predict that those who pay for it now will STOP and there will be no "free" for anyone.
Actually, no one has suggested that it be free for all. Instead, it is suggested that it be paid for by taxes. This system will work fine if there are not tons of bullshit costs built into the system. Allowing big pharma to get away with murder (more or less literally) in the name of profit is not an example of the government serving the citizenry. Copyrights and patents are rights granted by the government in the name of the people and if they do not serve the public good then they are counterproductive. (You also seem to be in favor of the free market, in which they do not belong.)
then we can join Canada and have ten month waiting lists for OB services.
The idea that Canadians wait longer than Americans for health care has been debunked ad nauseam, so I'm not going to do it again here, but I will point out that you are a bozo. But I guess your handle is truth in advertising. Do you get paid for this kind of astroturfing?
A friend of mine who was admitted to the hospital repeatedly and ended up having brain surgery was treated like some kind of junkie and made to wait for hours in the ER when she went in and complained about head pain. This was in Santa Cruz, California, one of the most expensive places to live in the world. Anecdotes are fun, but you didn't even give an anecdote, you only painted a picture. I prefer photographs.
Short form: put up, or shut up. kthx, bye.
Re:I'd do this in a second (Score:3, Informative)
Free for all means mediocre or poor for everyone.
That means: medical care in all other developed western countries is a poor quality one? Please, tell me your are kidding [photius.com] :-)
I guess the main point here is: some cultures sees the capitalism as a "way to achieve things" and other cultures sees it as a "life style".
UHC is seen as a "must have" for the first group, because health is not a "thing". It is a right for every human being. And UHC is evil for the second group, as health is included in the "things" list.
Re:I'd do this in a second (Score:3, Informative)
The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act passed! Don't you people read the news?
loc.gov [loc.gov]