Slashdot Mirror
DNA Data From California Newborn Blood Samples Stored, Sold To 3rd Parties (cbslocal.com)
schwit1 writes: "This might come as a surprise to California natives in their 20s and early 30s: The state owns your DNA. Every year about four million newborns in the U.S. get a heel prick at birth, to screen for congenital disorders, that if found early enough, can save their life." However, when those tests are done, the leftover blood isn't simply thrown away. Instead, they're taken to an office building and the DNA data is stored in a database. "It’s a treasure trove of information about you, from the color of your eyes and hair to your pre-disposition to diseases like Alzheimer’s and cancer." And that's not the end of it: "The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) is not the only agency using the blood spots. Law enforcement can request them. Private companies can buy them to do research – without your consent."
Standard herd-management practice; stop disrespecting your owners.
Eventually we will see a national DNA registry. Something like this will be how it starts.
We wont use it for anything else they said.
The government is just looking out for you they said.
The people who do this shit should be lined up and shot.
Law enforcement can request them. Private companies can buy them to do research - without your consent.
neccesarily means that
The state owns your DNA.
Surely it should be possible to establish that individuals own their DNA, particularly from the perspective of private companies that may want to buy them from the state. Lawsuit time?
These people are like modern day vampires, they want to suck you dry.
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
No doubt they can patent anything interesting that they find in your blood.
You won't be the first whose DNA made millions for other people.
...omphaloskepsis often...
Surely doctors have a duty of care to their patients that would include preventing this happening? Seems to me that a rather large class action suit might be out there soon...
DNA is Data.
The EU/US Data Treaty and the US/Canada Data Treaty both give citizens of those countries, even if born in the US, data privacy.
I smell class action lawsuits.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
I got out of Kali longer before the kids came.
the only reason there is an uproar is because the person who found out is the wife of some congressperson who is now trying to ban it outright
i believe you can formally request the blood destroyed tho
If they are doing this, there has to be a legal release form buried somewhere in the paperwork that people sign on admittance. There is no way a good medical lawyer would let this occur in a hospital that they were paid to represent, because of the possibility that people find out ten years later and crater the hospital with a class action lawsuit.
Of course, any pregnant woman admitted under emergency circumstances might not have had a chance to sign the papers before it is done..it seems that if this is true, someone is going to get sued for a lot of money over this.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
The first posting in a long time that's left me itching to RTFA
they still can't patent discoveries. Now, synthetic DNA yes, you can patent that. But then you didn't discover that, you made it. Although the problem with that is at what point did you 'discover' it or just make something naturally occurring...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Is it Facebook? It's the natural next step.
If the DNA information is just collected and stored anonymously, with no record of WHOSE DNA it is, I don't think it's a problem. It's useful for compiling statistics and doing studies. However, if law enforcement is interested in this data, it sounds like they are actually keeping track of who the DNA sample came from. Just make it anonymous.
For a FA?
Isn't there supposed to be a fucking article to go with this fine summary?
They take the placenta for "research".
What part of 1984 did you not understand???
If the blood spots are deidentified and can't be traced back to the child then why would law enforcement EVER request them? That proves they're not removing identification as they claim.
You know the rest.
Since when has Slashdot posted articles without links to corroborate the story? This is a new low even for Slashdot.
{Citation needed}
It is really strange to be sitting around as a typical gov't employee reading ./ and finding my very own job mentioned.
So yeah, we have all your blood, if you were born sometime around or after the mid eighties. We get roughly 500,000 samples a year, and the blood was until recently stored alongside Safeway's inventory at a local freezer facility.
We also have to special order baby blood for our reference samples, we have the best catalogs.
Now if you have any questions about this place, ask me, if I don't know, I can ask someone else. I am quitting for my Ph'D at the end of the year so you've got my time ./ as a thanks for giving me so much to read over the last six years.
the DNA data is stored in a database. "It's a treasure trove of information about you, from the color of your eyes and hair to your pre-disposition to diseases like Alzheimer's and cancer."
Is this true? Can they really see my "pre-disposition to diseases" with current technology? We if so I would like to know. I'm sure this info would be valuable to my family doctor. Since whenever I go to the doctor they don't seem to have a clue about anything.
Is there a link from a reputable news agency about this? Because as someone born in California who's in my early 30s, I'd like to verify this before I start to seriously consider organizing a class against them.
Surely there must be an interpretation of the DMCA whereby the originator of IP can prevent its misuse? Or does that apply only to corporations?
Finally - an advantage to being an old guy. All you young kids can worry about your DNA privacy AND get off my lawn!
In all seriousness, privacy is being eroded from so many directions, if we (and by we I mean almost everyone) don't start fighting against it, we will discover that the War on Privacy is over, and we have lost. In fact, between Facebook, Google, ISPs and electronic health records, it's probably over already - but I want to be optimistic.
Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
I realize RTFAing is heretical, but for the one or two who might consider it, where is the link to TFA to back up this story? Or did I miss the memo advising that "schwit1 writes" is /.ese for "here's something I just made up"?
And so the government would have everyone's DNA and no need to ever take it. Oh boy. And it can be planted at a crime 30 years later. Good luck with your defense.
From TFA: "And CDPH says the blood spots are de-identified and can’t be tracked back to the child." I don't see the issue here. This helps with medical research.
One day we will be able to predict who will be murderers, rapists and political dissenters and snuff them at birth.
Cheer up comrade, if you are still alive, then you are doing fine.
I do believe I have a right to be secure in my person, papers, etc against an unreasonable search or siezure...
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
You leave your DNA everywhere, especially as a baby. If you ever had a blood transfusion, then you also carry other people's DNA inside you.
Children should have the right to share their DNA data, or not, when they are adults. Therefore if you are an adult and you had your DNA data taken you should have the right to issue a take-down order if you do not want your data property effectively put into the public domain against your wishes.
Where's the warning label for this one then California?
And if 30 years later you turn out to be a rapist...great..someone will find you. DNA at birth should be mandatory. Hell, maybe a DNA sample at the airport would mean I don't need to carry ID.
Another in a long line of reasons why the left coast needs to hurry the fuck up and slide off into the pacific.
1) Nothing says what they buy is linked to any name
2) If some nefarious three-letter agency does want your DNA, they've got plenty of ways to get it from you, unless you spend your days walking around in a level 4 suit and burn your clothes afterwards
There has been public record DNA banks here for years. We're one of the single most genetically researched populations on earth, barring Ashkenazi Jews. Guess what, nothing happened. The thing which pissed most people off was that one of the tests that was developped from this research, Mozaic's BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation test, was proprietary and costly as hell. But the patent was cancelled and now it costs peanuts, and some people at high breast / ovarian cancer risk can have higher life expectancies.
Sure, go ahead, refuse the screening and avoid hospitals. If your kid happens to have phenylketouria, perhaps they'll sue you for damages. Well if they have not become complete vegetables by the time they're diagnosed.
*prepares popcorn*
What a surprise. A state that has been completely Jewified is doing this. I am shocked, shocked I tell you!
How quaint. Show us your buckled shoes! Stick your foot thru the Freedom Cage (TM) bars.
DNA Data From California Newborn Blood Samples Stored, Sold To 3rd Parties
Is the data identifiable? Meaning, can a donor be identified with a sample? That is the crux of the matter (and one the zealots in the interweebz seem keen to ignore.)
Is the data identifiable, then?
Yes: problem.
No: no problem.
Texas did this for many years, but got called out for it when it became clear that there were some transactions with the US Navy, using the dried blood samples for research. They were sued and had to eventually destroy 5 million samples
An article in Pediatrics from 2011, hosted at the US National Institute of Health, says that many states are still doing similar shady things with newborn blood samples, and that some don't even need to inform parents about how the samples are used after the initial testing is done.
"I must not fear. Fear is the mind killer." -Bene Gesserit Litany Against Fear
How is this not a HIPAA violation? DNA is absolutely personally identifiable information as a biometric identifier. It's being taken by a healthcare provider, which makes it a covered entity. Biometrics cannot be de-identified to be given to a partner institution. So they pretty much have to get patient consent to do the transfer and afterwards, said the receiving institution must obey the same rules; you can't de-HIPAA medical data.
This also means that these people can make a clone of you that they can ass rape over and over. And you may be able to psychically feel it. So, next time your ass hurts, ask yourself, "Is a secret clone of me being ass raped"?
Sequencing such a large volume of samples is not - currently - technically or financially practical. In Michigan, if you jump through special hoops, you can get them to cough up the samples to you personally. That's what I'm doing, before they decide to start building a big sequence database (with 'appropriate protections', of course).
PHEM - party like it's 1997-2003!
No link to proof