Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Hope To Attract Millions To "DNA.LAND" (nature.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Started by computational geneticist Yaniv Erlich, and geneticist Joseph Pickrell at the New York Genome Center and Columbia University in New York, DNA.Land is a project which hopes to create a crowdsourced DNA database for genetic studies. Nature reports: "The project, DNA.LAND, aims to entice people who have already had their genomes analyzed by consumer genetics companies to share that data, allowing DNA.LAND geneticists to study the information. Although some consumer genetic-testing companies share data with researchers, they provide only aggregate information about their customers, not individual genomes. Because the data are not always accompanied by detailed information on patients' health, they are of limited use for drawing links between genes and disease."
So they can create your clone and replace you with it.
Or so they can manufacture a virus targeting you by DNA remaining dormant in everyone else until it reaches you.
Among other things, next-generation DNA sequencing is the ultimate paternity test. There's enough information to determine a person's entire family tree out to many generations. But there are still countries where adultery is punished severely (e.g. death by stoning). I'm a big believer in allowing people to get their genomes sequenced and to freely share information that would allow them to interpret their genomes (i.e. freedom of speech). But those of us who have grown up in modern "western" cultures are going to have to understand that there are other cultures that do things very differently.
is not some secret plot to compile more dna records for the governments of the world (although that will happen anyway)...
but rather, the main goal is to try to justify the internet's new fucked up domain system by having an actual site on one instead of just parked domains, speculators, squatters, and victim (err i mean exploited trademark holders) redirects back to real sites on dot.coms even if they are way off-base on .land's target market of real estate.
As long as you don't even acknowledge that (given the failings of our current civil society) there's a problem with such a massive data collection I'm not willing to share a tidbit of data with you.
Enough damage has been done by us scientists "focussing on the scientific" problem and not thinking over the rest. Need I name examples?
So go do your homework (I know, it's difficult, but it's essential) and then we talk.
Where's The Double Helix roller coaster?
It is an interesting economic model: you give DNA.Land your (genome sequence) data and, in exchange, they provide you with an analysis of it. In a certain sense, this model already exists for research into rare genetic disorders: an extended family will agree to allow a research team to publish their case (with some effort to provide anonymity) in exchange for the research group analyzing their case. In the ideal world, families with rare genetic disorders would get help without having to sacrifice their privacy. But we don't live in an ideal world. :)
Along those lines, there are a number of efforts to implement government regulations on what a basic analysis of a person's genome sequence should, and should not, include. Personally, I'd rather let people provide whatever analysis they want (i.e. freedom of speech) but then the government can also provide a freely available website that provides a reference implementation of whatever analysis the government thinks should be run.
In a few years there will be all kinds of "free" genome analysis servers with all different kinds of funding models. It will be interesting to see which funding models turn out to be most popular.
I read the Nature article and, frankly, it's very troubling.
Erlich has studied the potential for unmasking the identities of anonymous donors of genetic data, and the study's consent document warns participants that “we cannot guarantee that your identity and/or data will never become known, which could have significant implications in some scenarios. We estimate that the risk for such a confidentiality breach is low but not zero.” Erlich and Pickrell have adopted what they call a “skin in the game” philosophy by making their own genomes publicly available.
"Usually, genomics studies suggest discussing your decision to participate with close family members," Meyer says. "Here, genomic data is combined with parents' names and dates of birth, both identifiers, so it was surprising that there was no mention of risks to family members."
My DNA is unique to me, so there really is no anonymity to begin with. It's just not linked to my name, address, SSN, etc. This information would be a gold mine to insurance companies, doctors, pharmaceutical companies, and perhaps potential employers. There's so much potential for abuse and so little security involved. Furthermore, it doesn't seem like relatives have the option to opt out from being referenced here, which means my privacy might be at risk without my consent. Sure, it won't include my own DNA, but it's still a huge risk.
I understand the scientific value of such a data set, but there's just way too much risk involved.
M-I-Z
kU still sucks!
Can you build it next to the Creation Museum?
They can get my DNA from my cold, dead hands.
Very seriously, They can take it when I'm dead. Privacy won't matter to me then and the data is still useful for them. probably even more useful because they now have a cause of death which means more data.
They should really consider this. Probably some sign-up process like they do for organ donors.
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)