Genetic Privacy

[Aloha Hoosier]

From the below article:

Previously, DNA was used like fingerprints. Police would identify a suspect using traditional investigative means — canvassing the neighborhood, questioning witnesses, etc. — then collect a sample from their suspect. If it matched the DNA at the crime scene, it was good evidence they had found the perpetrator.

Genetic genealogy works the other way around. Police start with a DNA sample from the crime scene and enter it into public or commercial databases like GEDmatch, where people have voluntarily submitted their DNA, usually for genealogical purposes.

That allows police to find a relative of the perpetrator. Then they build that relative’s family tree. That family tree becomes a list of potential suspects.

Method used to nab Kohberger is invaluable, but it exposes threats to genetic privacy | Opinion

Whether you know it or not, you’ve already probably lost your genetic privacy. It will take careful regulation to claw it back. | Opinion

www.yahoo.com

I think this could be a bit of a tricky one. What do you think?

 

[larsIU]

A lot of criminals in the future are going to get screwed because someone in their somewhat immediate family paid for 23andme.

There has to be a conspiracy out there where 23andme is a false flag black op to set up some Minority Report-esque d/b to more easily catch criminals. Right?

People should really read the fine print on this stuff. IANAL so I won’t opine re: whether it is constitutional or not.

However, I don’t have a problem with it as long as there are safeguards in place to not allow fishing expeditions to go too far and we protect the rights of potential suspects/witnesses/bystanders.

 

[George.Smalley]

It’s another case where people pay someone to amass a valuable database. Rubes

 

[larsIU]

It’s another case where people pay someone to amass a valuable database. Rubes

Imagine the actual datamine that is the joining of genetic data like this and Tik Tok user data. Mix in a little stolen health data. Bingo bango.

Burn it all down Pookie.

 

[DANC]

From the below article:

Previously, DNA was used like fingerprints. Police would identify a suspect using traditional investigative means — canvassing the neighborhood, questioning witnesses, etc. — then collect a sample from their suspect. If it matched the DNA at the crime scene, it was good evidence they had found the perpetrator.

Genetic genealogy works the other way around. Police start with a DNA sample from the crime scene and enter it into public or commercial databases like GEDmatch, where people have voluntarily submitted their DNA, usually for genealogical purposes.

That allows police to find a relative of the perpetrator. Then they build that relative’s family tree. That family tree becomes a list of potential suspects.

Method used to nab Kohberger is invaluable, but it exposes threats to genetic privacy | Opinion

Whether you know it or not, you’ve already probably lost your genetic privacy. It will take careful regulation to claw it back. | Opinion

www.yahoo.com

I think this could be a bit of a tricky one. What do you think?

I think you sound worried.

 

[TMFT]

I don’t sweat this at all, I think it’s just the next step in forensic technology.

250 years ago the concept of fingerprints would have seemed like voodoo, that you could place someone at a crime scene with no eyewitnesses and only got lucky because the perpetrator happened to have their fingerprints taken somewhere else at some other time.

I, for one, was fingerprinted as a little kid by the local police. I guess in case we were kidnapped or something?

When DNA testing first came out it was even popularly referred to as “DNA Fingerprinting.” The loss in privacy in the world somehow finding out you’re predisposed to diabetes seems pretty low compared to the ability to solve serious crimes.

 

[IUCrazy2]

Nothing to be worried about. We have courts and Democracy to shield us I have been told.

 

[larsIU]

I don’t sweat this at all, I think it’s just the next step in forensic technology.

250 years ago the concept of fingerprints would have seemed like voodoo, that you could place someone at a crime scene with no eyewitnesses and only got lucky because the perpetrator happened to have their fingerprints taken somewhere else at some other time.

I, for one, was fingerprinted as a little kid by the local police. I guess in case we were kidnapped or something?

When DNA testing first came out it was even popularly referred to as “DNA Fingerprinting.” The loss in privacy in the world somehow finding out you’re predisposed to diabetes seems pretty low compared to the ability to solve serious crimes.

My only concern is it's another data mine. Which isn't necessarily bad. I don't even worry about the big bad federal government using it.

I'm more worried about the further erosion of community that will be inflicted by the social media and big corps as they continue to market at the most micro levels.

Should be great for catching criminals though. And probably linking disparate data points to learn something new. On balance, probably a good idea.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

From the below article:

Previously, DNA was used like fingerprints. Police would identify a suspect using traditional investigative means — canvassing the neighborhood, questioning witnesses, etc. — then collect a sample from their suspect. If it matched the DNA at the crime scene, it was good evidence they had found the perpetrator.

Genetic genealogy works the other way around. Police start with a DNA sample from the crime scene and enter it into public or commercial databases like GEDmatch, where people have voluntarily submitted their DNA, usually for genealogical purposes.

That allows police to find a relative of the perpetrator. Then they build that relative’s family tree. That family tree becomes a list of potential suspects.

Method used to nab Kohberger is invaluable, but it exposes threats to genetic privacy | Opinion

Whether you know it or not, you’ve already probably lost your genetic privacy. It will take careful regulation to claw it back. | Opinion

www.yahoo.com

I think this could be a bit of a tricky one. What do you think?

There are other government things we should worry about more than this. This doesn’t give me much heartburn.

There may be a time when the businesses who hold these huge DNA data bases will tell the cops to GTH, then congress and the courts will step in and the whole thing will be a hot mess.

 

[UncleMark]

There has to be a conspiracy out there where 23andme is a false flag black op to set up some Minority Report-esque d/b to more easily catch criminals. Right?

At this point (and in this circumstance) all it's doing is narrowing the field of possible suspects. In the Idaho case, they identified a family group, then they went looking for someone in that group who drove a white Hyundai that they'd already identified as a possible lead.

Of course, if the perp has submitted his own DNA to the site, it's game over.

 

[larsIU]

At this point (and in this circumstance) all it's doing is narrowing the field of possible suspects. In the Idaho case, they identified a family group, then they went looking for someone in that group who drove a white Hyundai that they'd already identified as a possible lead.

Of course, if the perp has submitted his own DNA to the site, it's game over.

But somebody in his family had to have submitted, either voluntarily or involuntarily right?

 

[UncleMark]

But somebody in his family had to have submitted, either voluntarily or involuntarily right?

Of course. All they did was determine that the target DNA was part of a "family tree" they could construct from already submitted DNA.

 

[larsIU]

Of course. All they did was determine that the target DNA was part of a "family tree" they could construct from already submitted DNA.

My assumption at this point is that any data somebody wants about me they could get should they truly desire it.

Guess I won't be running for president anytime soon.

 

[UncleMark]

My assumption at this point is that any data somebody wants about me they could get should they truly desire it.

Guess I won't be running for president anytime soon.

I don't know if past behavior matters anymore. Sure hasn't lately.

 

[larsIU]

I don't know if past behavior matters anymore. Sure hasn't lately.

I think there's going to be a bit of backlash. Kinda like after Clinton.

 

[Ohio Guy]

I don't know if past behavior matters anymore. Sure hasn't lately.

I wondered with everything mentioned in this thread that make things harder to hide (social media, everyone has a camera/video camera on their person) and people being more easily identifiable if that will deter crimes that were more readily committed in the past. This isn't a fully formed thought, but there just seem to be a lot more deterrents to crime these days that weren't around even a decade ago.

I get that there will always be boneheads committing crimes, but I wonder if there will be a net negative in certain types of crimes over the next several decades simply due to the fact that it will be almost impossible to do certain crimes without a high probability of getting caught.

 

[Joe_Hoopsier]

My assumption at this point is that any data somebody wants about me they could get should they truly desire it.

Guess I won't be running for president anytime soon.

Didn't they have to get a warrant and have probable cause in the past? What is the difference in rounding up everyone in a town that a crime occurred and water boarding each person until they get a lead?

 

[DANC]

Didn't they have to get a warrant and have probable cause in the past? What is the difference in rounding up everyone in a town that a crime occurred and water boarding each person until they get a lead?

It's only a matter of time before a law will be passed to collect DNA from newborns.

 

[TMFT]

Didn't they have to get a warrant and have probable cause in the past? What is the difference in rounding up everyone in a town that a crime occurred and water boarding each person until they get a lead?

They need a warrant if they want to get it from any individual person. If something is in a private database, they just need the information holder to release it.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

A lot of criminals in the future are going to get screwed because someone in their somewhat immediate family paid for 23andme.

There has to be a conspiracy out there where 23andme is a false flag black op to set up some Minority Report-esque d/b to more easily catch criminals. Right?

People should really read the fine print on this stuff. IANAL so I won’t opine re: whether it is constitutional or not.

However, I don’t have a problem with it as long as there are safeguards in place to not allow fishing expeditions to go too far and we protect the rights of potential suspects/witnesses/bystanders.

define "screwed"

a criminal being caught and punished for their crime is not being "screwed".

victims who's perpetrators get away with crimes against them, are the ones who have gotten screwed.

someone wrongly convicted for something they didn't do, has gotten "screwed".

until such time someone shows me this brings more harm than good, i'm all for it.

 

[larsIU]

define "screwed"

a criminal being caught and punished for their crime is not being "screwed".

victims who's perpetrators get away with crimes against them, are the ones who have gotten screwed.

someone wrongly convicted for something they didn't do, has gotten "screwed".

until such time someone shows me this brings more harm than good, i'm all for it.

fine, comeuppance?

 

[Cthulhu85]

They did a beta test for this in 2017. They chose to do it at NFL games because of the low IQ population, which is the average US population.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/11/08/562564639/you-can-get-your-dna-tested-at-an-nfl-game-should-you

They've already been using them to solve cold cases.

35-year-old cold case murder in Wisconsin solved using DNA and genealogy, police say

Philip Cross, who died of a drug overdose in 2012, was identified as a suspect in the 1984 murder after police compared DNA to a genealogy database.

www.google.com

There is no privacy anymore anywhere really.

 

[Cthulhu85]

Does anyone ever read their terms of agreement for anything? All they would need is a 5 page form with the release consent stuck in the middle.

 

[outside shooter]

I don't worry about using DNA databases to solve crimes, but I would have issues with (say) insurance companies digging into DNA databases and setting higher rates based upon risk actors that they see in my DNA profile.

 

[Sope Creek]

There is no privacy anymore anywhere really.

No truer words have ever been spoken.

No self-respecting privacy lawyer would ever agree to Facebook's or Amazon Web Service's terms, for example.

 

[UncleMark]

I don't worry about using DNA databases to solve crimes, but I would have issues with (say) insurance companies digging into DNA databases and setting higher rates based opon risk actors that they see in my DNA profile.

For health insurance, that's been largely mooted owing to the ACA and coverage of pre-existing conditions.

Now for life insurance, that might be altogether different.

 

[TomEric4756]

I have declined to submit DNA samples … My great aunt traced the family tree back to the 16th century parish church fire where all the records got burned. My Mom did her half and found she could join the DAR. I think I know everything I need to know. The FBI got my fingerprints when I drove a cab for a summer job.

 

[abraxis]

Anyone who submitted a cotton swab for a Covid test, wouldn’t they now have a DNA sample capable of submission to a data bank? I don’t believe they just throw these things away. They got ‘ya now, Baby…boogers, snot and whatnot. Words for the wise, keep your nose clean for you never know where and when it turns up.

 

[anon_6hv78pr714xta]

Anyone who submitted a cotton swab for a Covid test, wouldn’t they now have a DNA sample capable of submission to a data bank? I don’t believe they just throw these things away. They got ‘ya now, Baby…boogers, snot and whatnot. Words for the wise, keep your nose clean for you never know where and when it turns up.

Huh:

Are COVID-19 Swab Samples a Threat to Your DNA Privacy?

Bioethicist Art Caplan discusses a lawsuit regarding DNA samples used for COVID-19 testing.

www.medscape.com