All your DNA belong to us

d0gb0y

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1078821/New-law-allow-police-collect-DNA-secret-teacups.html

I wonder how long till they start selling your DNA to the likes of Monsanto so they can make a "better" version of you or me.
With all the problems with related to tagging DNA it makes ye wonder whats the feckin point

Shazbot

Not really that strange. Simply adding to the DNA database, a more elaborate form of identification eg. fingerprints.

I wonder how long till they start selling your DNA to the likes of Monsanto so they can make a "better" version of you or me

How long? A bloody long time. Genetics isn't developed enough to attempt such experiments so calm down. Your not going to run into a government clone of yourself anytime soon.

d0gb0y

Shazbot wrote: »

How long? A bloody long time. Genetics isn't developed enough to attempt such experiments so calm down. Your not going to run into a government clone of yourself anytime soon.

Sorry for making a scene:o

Tbh only a few people actually know how close humanity is to cloning humans. If they cloned a sheep 9 years ago, whats to say that they are not able to clone humans with the speed at which technology is advancing. Since "they" control the media 'they" decide what the unwashed masses should know.
Anyway back to the collection of the DNA by the police in questionable circumstances and all the associated problems of gathering it and storing it for as long as they wish to be used against you at some later date & also to be sold on to private companies, such as Insurance etc

andrewlownie101

Shazbot wrote: »

How long? A bloody long time. Genetics isn't developed enough to attempt such experiments so calm down. Your not going to run into a government clone of yourself anytime soon.

Like you know anything about how advanced they are with this.

What, did Popular Science not think so?

Mahatma coat

because the magazine 'popular science' is a bunch of arse

I railed againt having my DNA sampled by the police over here the first time I was arresed, they took it by force, Can I prove that, my word against theirs HAHA. but they've never tzken it again,even though they told me at the time that it wouldnt be stored or kept after I went to court, HAHAHAHA Bollox, once they get you they've got you.

Shazbot

andrewlownie101 wrote: »

Like you know anything about how advanced they are with this.

Well i do read scientific papers everyday, not always on this topic but i know enough to make my previous statement.

What, did Popular Science not think so?

Fantastic source..... try reading from the source if your going to make condescending remarks.

Mahatma, why did you get so up in arms about them taking your DNA? Would you have done the same if they wanted prints or photographic ID? They're not looking to map your gene sequence and expose your genetic faults/gifts. It's simply another, more acurate, form of ID.

d0gb0y

Shazbot wrote: »

Well i do read scientific papers everyday, not always on this topic but i know enough to make my previous statement.


Fantastic source..... try reading from the source if your going to make condescending remarks.

Mahatma, why did you get so up in arms about them taking your DNA? Would you have done the same if they wanted prints or photographic ID? They're not looking to map your gene sequence and expose your genetic faults/gifts. It's simply another, more acurate, form of ID.

Ok some food for thought:D
http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12376658

http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0050201&ct=1

Shazbot

d0gb0y wrote: »

Ok some food for thought:D
http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12376658

http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0050201&ct=1

Nice links and interesting reads, so thanks for that. But, they have nothing to do with the topid at hand, nor does it fall under the realm of conspiracy theories.

They basically said that the papers the elite journals (nature and science) choose to publish may be the wrong. The chosen papers are more interesting and ground breaking with possible revelations in the field and they overlook the more mundayne and basic papers. Afterall, there has to be a high benchmark, it's simply an olympics of science, only the best get there. Afterall there are hundreds of other journals to publish the more mediocere papers in.

People will always read the papers relevant to their area regardless of the journal it's published in so I wouldn't be to concerned about Dr Ioannidis findings.

d0gb0y

Agreed, the topic at hand should be the thing that we are addressing.

I don't feel comfortable with the ways that DNA samples can be obtained using some of the techniques described by my original link. DNA collection in itself is far from perfect especially if they are taking DNA samples from a whole house where they might not know who's DNA they are collecting. There is also the point about the samples themselves especially if they are collected from things such as cups. Contamination is one of the biggest obstacles that the DNA industry faces and there is the ever present false positive factor.
We all know that systems such as these are open to abuse from the inside & the outside and these are very clear dangers which will ruin many peoples lives in the end.