Slashdot Mirror


UC Berkeley Asking Incoming Students For DNA

peterofoz writes "The students will be asked to voluntarily submit a DNA sample. The cotton swabs will come with two bar code labels. One label will be put on the DNA sample and the other is kept for the students' own records. The confidential process is being overseen by Jasper Rine, a campus professor of Genetics and Development Biology, who says the test results will help students make decisions about their diet and lifestyle." No word in the story on just what "confidential" means — who will have access to the results, how long they'll be kept, or what else they might someday be used for. Will the notoriously liberal Berkeley campus see this as a service or an invasion of privacy?

4 of 468 comments (clear)

  1. I'm torn by Monkeedude1212 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's voluntary, so there is no invasion of privacy going on, when you give up your DNA willingly you can't be expected it to be held very strongly in confidentiality. It's kind of like that whole unsecured Wifi debacle. If you don't know exactly what they want to do with your DNA, you'd be a fool to give it to them. That is their mistake to make though, I'm not going to deny them that by saying this kind of action should be illegal.

    If kids want dietting tips, or help on decisions, there are plenty of resources out there. I'm a little more paranoid at the idea of this becoming Comfortable. First its "Let us take your DNA to help you diet". Even if only 10% of people sign up, if they enjoy their results they'll tell their friends to partake in it next year. It will grow, until more schools are doing it. Then the elementary schools will do it. Then that confidentiality agreement will phase away, and there goes the neighbourhood.

    I guess the only course of action is to warn people of the dangers and hope they make the right choice.

  2. Re:Absolutely UNREAL that the Berkeley IRB approve by rotide · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Did you notice it was voluntary? It's not a requirement. If a freshman doesn't want to do it, it appears they can just not do it. Not sure if people should be fired for offering voluntary choices to new students. I guess, however, in our coddled child society, choices might confuse and damage the young minds. If we don't spoon feed them and water everything down to the bare minimum, they might not be able to cope!

  3. Re:Privacy by oldspewey · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is only a problem while "one side" has a monopoly on the use of these technologies. If invasive technology is ubiquitous and uncontrollable, then any abuse of that technology should be totally transparent to everybody.

    In short, the answer to "who will watch the watchers" needs to be "everyone ... and records should be kept forever."

    --
    If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
  4. UC Berkeley's Not Liberal by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 3, Interesting

    UC Berkeley's campus isn't liberal. It's got the most stereotypical frat/sorority ghetto I've ever seen. Its budget is stuffed with defense contractor and other giant corporation contracts, especially oil and telecom corps. Its law school hired John Yoo, the Bush lawyer who wrote the US torture regime rationalizations.

    The list goes on. But these "Conservative" (corporatist, or worse) activities are defined by being exclusive, even covert, even secret. While Berkeley's actually "liberal" (or whatever's not "Conservative") activities are usually defined by being public, even extroverted. Then take the mass media's interest in hiding the "Conservative" activities behind a distracting "liberal" show, and you get Berkeley a reputation for being "liberal".

    --

    --
    make install -not war